Case 1600421/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Roberts v ACM Marketing Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600421/2019
- Decision date
- 2 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harfield Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Roberts
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Harfield determined the case on 20 August 2019 in the absence of an ET3 response form from ACM Marketing Ltd. The tribunal recorded that there was sufficient material before it to make a proper determination and, applying Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, upheld the claim for arrears of pay in the gross sum of £1,583.00.
The judgment does not set out further factual findings or separate liability analysis beyond the default judgment under Rule 21. It also states that the claimant is responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions due on the sums awarded in respect of unpaid wages and unpaid holiday pay, although the only quantified award recorded is arrears of pay of £1,583.00.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal upheld a claim for arrears of pay (gross) of £1,583.00 under Rule 21 because the respondent did not present an ET3 response and there was sufficient material to determine the claim. | Upheld | — | £1,583 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,583
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.