Case 1403719/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Sandells v AND ERB Projects Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1403719/2023
- Decision date
- 10 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Sandells
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued in chambers at Plymouth on 26 July 2023 after the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented. The tribunal therefore determined the claims on the papers.
The claimant, Mr W Sandells, succeeded in his claim for breach of contract. The tribunal ordered ERB Projects Limited to pay four weeks' notice pay in the sum of £1,800.00.
The claimant also succeeded in his claim for unlawful deduction from wages, for which the tribunal ordered payment of £900.00 gross. His claim for accrued but unpaid holiday pay likewise succeeded, and the tribunal ordered payment of £1,800.00 gross.
The judgment records no separate award for basic award, compensatory award, injury to feelings, or interest. The combined monetary award from the three claims was £4,500.00.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim for four weeks' notice pay succeeded; respondent ordered to pay £1,800.00. | Upheld | — | £1,800 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unlawful deduction from wages succeeded; respondent ordered to pay £900.00 gross. | Upheld | — | £900 |
| Holiday pay | Claim for accrued but unpaid holiday pay succeeded; respondent ordered to pay £1,800.00 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,800 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,500
- 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.