Case 1600572/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C R Golding v Involve Recruitment — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600572/2019
- Decision date
- 20 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Havard Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C R Golding
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Havard determined the case under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because no ET3 response form had been presented by the respondent, and the judge was satisfied there was sufficient material to make a proper determination. On that basis, the tribunal upheld the claimant's claim for unpaid wages, assessed in the judgment as gross £702.
The judgment records 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. No separate award for holiday pay is set out in the operative part of the judgment, and no further remedy breakdown is given.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment states the claim upheld was unpaid wages (gross) of £702. The reference to unpaid holiday pay in the tax/NI note appears to be template wording and no separate holiday pay award is identified. | Upheld | — | £702 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £702
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.