Case 1402479/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Martin v AND Brits Security and FM Ltd THE TIME FOR PRESENTING A RESPONSE HAVING EXPIRED AND NO VALID RESPONSE HAVING BEEN PRESENTED — 2021
- Case reference
- 1402479/2021
- Decision date
- 9 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningJudgment under Rule 21 was entered because the respondent's time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented. The listed hearing on 10 December 2021 was vacated, and the tribunal determined the claim on the papers.
Mr S Martin's claim for outstanding notice pay succeeded, and the respondent was ordered to pay £30.00 in respect of notice pay. His claim for outstanding holiday pay also succeeded, with an award of £90.00, described in the judgment as 56% of 5.6 weeks.
The tribunal further ordered the respondent to pay a further two weeks' pay, amounting to £60, for failing to provide a written contract of employment. The extracted judgment contains no additional reasoning or legal analysis beyond those awards.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim for outstanding notice pay; the tribunal ordered £30.00 in respect of notice pay. | Upheld | — | £30 |
| Holiday pay | Claim for outstanding holiday pay; the tribunal ordered £90.00, described as 56% of 5.6 weeks. | Upheld | — | £90 |
| Breach of contract | Further award of two weeks' pay for failing to provide a written contract of employment. | Upheld | — | £60 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £180
- 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.