Case 1601286/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Megan Pope v The Towers Swansea Bay Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1601286/2020
- Decision date
- 16 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Davies Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Megan Pope
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge P Davies dealt with the claim on 7 October 2020 in the absence of an ET3 response form from The Towers Swansea Bay Limited. The judgment states that there was sufficient material before the tribunal to determine the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal upheld two heads of claim: unpaid wages of £143.08 gross and holiday pay of £157.08. The total awarded was £300.16.
The judgment 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. The judgment was sent to the parties on 16 October 2020.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded as unpaid wages (gross). The judgment was issued in the absence of an ET3 response under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | £143 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded for unpaid holiday pay. The judgment was issued in the absence of an ET3 response under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | £157 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £300
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.