Case 1600248/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Burman v HR Timber Frame Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600248/2019
- Decision date
- 24 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Brace Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Burman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr N Burman brought a complaint against HR Timber Frame Limited under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. At the Cardiff hearing on 23 August 2019, before Employment Judge R Brace, the tribunal held that the complaint was well-founded and made a declaration to that effect.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £5,771.81. That sum comprised £5,833.30 for non-payment of wages for October 2018 and 1 to 8 November 2018, £500 for non-payment of car allowance for October 2018 and 1 to 8 November 2018, and £166.66 each for non-payment of wages for August 2018 and September 2018. From that total the tribunal deducted £894.81 for holidays taken in excess of entitlement, made up of £861.52 and an overpayment of £33.39.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint was brought under section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996 and was held well-founded. The award was made after deducting £894.81 for holidays taken in excess of entitlement (£861.52) and an overpayment (£33.39). | Upheld | — | £5,772 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,772
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.