Case 1600847/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr T Williams v Mrs Christine Charlton (acting for the estate of Mr Brian Charlton) Heard: By video — 2024

Case reference: 1600847/2023
Decision date: 30 September 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge S Moore Representation

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr T Williams

Respondent

Mrs Christine Charlton (acting for the estate of Mr Brian Charlton) Heard: By video

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claim was issued on 29 April 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time and did not attend the hearing on 18 September 2024, so Employment Judge S Moore determined the case under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.

The tribunal found the complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages, breach of contract for notice pay, holiday pay, redundancy payment, and unfair dismissal well-founded. It held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction of £1,773.20 in January 2023, failed to pay notice pay of £835.20, and failed to pay £927.07 for accrued but untaken holiday when employment ended. The claimant was also entitled to a redundancy payment of £835.20 under sections 163 and 174(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The unfair dismissal complaint succeeded. The tribunal awarded £5,718.78 as a compensatory award and £500 for loss of statutory rights, made no basic award because a redundancy payment had been awarded, and recorded that the compensation was reduced to reflect the notice pay award and universal credit received over 22.5 weeks. The prescribed element was £5,718.78 for the period from 31 January 2023 to 18 September 2024, with a difference of £0.

The tribunal also found a breach of section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide written particulars and awarded £835.20, being two weeks' gross pay rather than four. The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 applied to the unfair dismissal award.

Claims and outcomes

6 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages in January 2023 and ordered payment of the gross sum deducted.	Upheld	—	£1,773
Breach of contract	Notice pay was awarded as damages for breach of contract, calculated using gross pay to reflect post-employment notice pay.	Upheld	—	£835
Holiday pay	The tribunal found that holiday accrued but untaken at the end of employment had not been paid.	Upheld	—	£927
Redundancy	The claimant was held entitled to a redundancy payment under sections 163 and 174(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.	Upheld	—	£835
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal awarded a compensatory award of £5,718.78 plus £500 for loss of statutory rights. No basic award was made because a redundancy payment had been awarded, and the compensation was reduced to reflect the notice pay award and universal credit received over 22.5 weeks.	Upheld	—	£6,219
Other	This was the section 38 Employment Act 2002 award for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars. The tribunal found no exceptional circumstances and awarded two weeks' gross pay rather than four.	Upheld

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £11,425; across all upheld claims
Basic award: £0; statutory, unfair dismissal
Compensatory award: £5,719; compensatory remedy recorded

Legal tests applied

5 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.