Case 1601599/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Geeks Barber Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1601599/2018
- Decision date
- 6 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Beard Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Mold on 5 August 2019 before Employment Judge NW Beard, recorded that the claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not appear. It held that the claimant's claims of automatic unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction of wages were well founded.
The judgment states that the respondent was ordered to pay compensation of £3,057.52. The calculation included a basic award of £360.00, loss of earnings for five weeks at £321.10 (£1,605.50), and unpaid holiday pay of 28 days at £72 (£2,016.00), less sums already paid of £923.98.
The resulting subtotal was £2,697.52 and the total award was £3,057.52. The judgment does not provide any separate reasoning beyond the written calculation, and it does not allocate the total award separately between the two upheld claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records the claim as 'automatic unfair dismissal' and finds it well founded. The judgment does not split the award separately by claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment finds the unlawful deduction of wages claim well founded. The award was not expressly allocated claim-by-claim, although the calculation includes unpaid holiday pay and sums already paid. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,058
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £360
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £2,698
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.