Case 1601817/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr David Ian Tovey v Go Commercial Finance Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1601817/2018
- Decision date
- 29 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Beard Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr David Ian Tovey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Beard recorded that the respondent had not filed an ET3 response form. On the material before the tribunal, and acting under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, the judge said there was sufficient material to make a proper determination.
The judgment upheld the claim for unpaid wages and awarded £3,583.33 gross. No separate analysis of liability beyond the Rule 21 default position is set out in the extracted text, and no distinct award breakdown is given for different heads of claim.
The judgment also states that the claimant is responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions that may be due on the sums awarded in respect of unpaid wages and unpaid holiday pay. The only quantified award recorded in the judgment is £3,583.33 gross.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment was determined in the absence of an ET3 response form under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment records an award for unpaid wages of £3,583.33 gross and does not set out a separate split for any other head of claim. | Upheld | — | £3,583 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,583
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal 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.