Case 1600814/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Walker v Broadband Infrastructure Company Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1600814/2021
- Decision date
- 15 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharp Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Walker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment after the respondent failed to present a valid response in time. The claim had been issued in the Wales Employment Tribunals on 6 June 2021, and the Employment Judge decided that liability, or part of it, could properly be determined on that basis.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages, had failed to provide a written pay statement, and had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It also found that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed as a result of asserting a statutory right.
No judgment on liability was given for the claimant's contractual notice pay claim, because the claimant had to prove contractual entitlement. Remedy was not determined in this judgment and was left to a remedy hearing; the case management hearing listed for 31 January 2022 was to be converted into a liability hearing on the notice pay issue and a remedy hearing.
Claims and outcomes
4 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. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to provide the claimant with a written pay statement. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed as a result of asserting a statutory right. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | — |
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.