Case 1403863/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr E Ward AND v G Performance Cars Ltd — 2023

Case reference: 1403863/2022
Decision date: 6 February 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr E Ward AND

Respondent

G Performance Cars Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The case was determined on 24 January 2023 in chambers under Rule 21 after the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented. Employment Judge N J Roper dealt with the claim on the papers.

The tribunal held that the claimant’s breach of contract claim succeeded and ordered the respondent to pay one month’s notice pay of £1,026.40. It also upheld the unlawful deduction from wages claim and ordered payment of unpaid commission in the gross sum of £9,000.00.

Two further claims also succeeded. The tribunal ordered payment of accrued but unpaid holiday pay in the gross sum of £1,026.40, and it found that the respondent had failed to issue the claimant with a written statement of the terms of his employment, for which it ordered four weeks’ pay of £1,026.40. The total monetary award was therefore £12,079.20.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Breach of contract	Succeeding on one month’s notice pay ordered under the Rule 21 judgment.	Upheld	—	£1,026
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal ordered payment of unpaid commission in the gross sum of £9,000.00.	Upheld	—	£9,000
Holiday pay	The tribunal ordered payment of accrued but unpaid holiday pay at four weeks’ pay.	Upheld	—	£1,026
Other	The tribunal found the respondent failed to issue a written statement of the terms of employment and ordered four weeks’ pay.	Upheld	—	£1,026

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £12,079; across all upheld claims

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.