Case 1404811/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Snape v BJM Group — 2021
- Case reference
- 1404811/2020
- Decision date
- 2 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Snape
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment by Employment Judge Livesey in case 1404811/2020. The tribunal determined the claims on the papers and found for Mr T Snape on each pleaded monetary claim against BJM Group.
The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages. It ordered payment of £7,816 gross, described in the judgment as eight months at £977.
It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £225.46. In addition, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,127.30, described as 25 days.
The judgment does not record separate findings on statutory unfair dismissal or discrimination. No interest, basic award, compensatory award, or injury to feelings award is stated in the text provided; the monetary awards recorded sum to £9,168.76 in total.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £7,816, described as 8 months at £977. | Upheld | — | £7,816 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £225.46. | Upheld | — | £225 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,127.30, described as 25 days. | Upheld | — | £1,127 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,169
- 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.