Case 1405389/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Coughlan v Panelox Systems Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1405389/2023
- Decision date
- 22 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bax Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Coughlan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 4 October 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined that judgment could properly be entered under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. Neither party objected to the proposed judgment sent to the parties on 22 January 2024.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages in relation to overtime, and ordered the respondent to pay £46.88 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement, and ordered payment of £172.50.
The total amount ordered was £219.38. The judgment does not record any separate award for injury to feelings, interest, or other remedy heads.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of overtime of £46.88 gross. | Upheld | — | £47 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £172.50. | Upheld | — | £173 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £219
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.