Case 1400572/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Passmore v Street Food Fiesta Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1400572/2022
- Decision date
- 22 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Passmore
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Bristol Employment Tribunals on 11 February 2022. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Smail determined the matter under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the papers.
The tribunal found that Street Food Fiesta Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from Mr Passmore’s wages. It accepted the calculation set out in the judgment: 85.25 hours at £11 an hour, less £700 already paid, leaving £237.75 gross outstanding.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay accrued holiday entitlement. It awarded £1,349.70 gross, calculated as 122.7 hours of holiday pay at £11 an hour, with reference to 64 hours of contractual 186.7 holiday hours having been taken in the course of the year. The total sum ordered was £1,587.45 gross, payable within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of the outstanding balance, calculated as 85.25 hours at £11 per hour less £700 already paid. | Upheld | — | £238 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay accrued holiday entitlement and ordered payment of 122.7 hours of holiday pay at £11 per hour. | Upheld | — | £1,350 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,587
- across all upheld claims
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.