Case 1405550/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Brunsdon v Newquay Divers Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 1405550/2023
- Decision date
- 6 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Brunsdon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the South-West Employment Tribunals on 19 October 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment therefore records a determination on the papers rather than after a contested hearing.
The tribunal found that Newquay Divers Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay £6,557.26 net in respect of that claim. The judgment does not set out a further breakdown of how that figure was calculated.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £1,824.36 net for that head of claim. The judgment records a total sum due of £8,381.62.
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 wages and ordered payment of £6,557.26 net. | Upheld | — | £6,557 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,824.36 net. | Upheld | — | £1,824 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,382
- 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.