Case 1403139/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Tozer v Jade Horsley and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 1403139/2022
- Decision date
- 10 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr T Tozer
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting at Bristol by video on 24 May 2024 before Employment Judge Ferguson, found that the Claimant Mr T Tozer was employed by the First Respondent, Jade Horsley. The Tribunal held that the First Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,688, and had failed to pay the Claimant's holiday entitlement, ordering payment of £588.
The Tribunal further increased the award by £844, representing two weeks' pay, pursuant to section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. The First Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant a total sum of £3,120.
The judgment is a rule 61 short-form judgment; reasons were given orally at the hearing and written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The document does not separately discuss any claim against the Second Respondent, Palm Bay NQY Ltd, and the orders are made against the First Respondent only.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found the First Respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant's wages; gross sum of £1,688 ordered. | Upheld | — | £1,688 |
| Holiday pay | Tribunal found the First Respondent failed to pay the Claimant's holiday entitlement; £588 ordered. | Upheld | — | £588 |
| Other | Award increased by £844 (two weeks' pay) pursuant to section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 (failure to provide written statement of particulars). Categorised as 'other' as it does not map cleanly to the locked §4.4 enum. | Upheld | — | £844 |
| Breach of contract | Listed on gov.uk under Breach of Contract / Contract of Employment but the short rule 61 judgment does not separately adjudicate a breach of contract claim distinct from the wages and holiday pay awards. Outcome unclear from the document; flagged with lower confidence. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,120
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 38 of the Employment Act 2002
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.