Case 1601879/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Johns v Glam Rocks Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1601879/2021
- Decision date
- 6 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Brace Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Johns
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Cardiff by CVP on 3 January 2023, before Employment Judge R Brace, the respondent did not attend. The tribunal found the claimant's complaint under section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996 to be well-founded and made a declaration to that effect.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £1,094.27 for unpaid wages in September 2021 and £534.60 for unpaid wages for 60 hours worked in October 2021. Those sums were treated as unpaid wages within the section 23 claim.
The tribunal also found a breach of Regulation 14(2) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 because the respondent had not paid a sum in lieu of 4 days' accrued but untaken holiday when employment ended. It awarded a further £285.12 for that holiday pay. The claimant was held responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions due on the wages and holiday-pay awards.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996 complaint found well-founded. The award comprised unpaid wages of £1,094.27 for September 2021 and £534.60 for 60 hours worked in October 2021. | Upheld | — | £1,629 |
| Holiday pay | Under Regulation 14(2) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, the respondent failed to pay a sum in lieu of 4 days' accrued but untaken holiday on termination, calculated at £8.91 per hour. | Upheld | — | £285 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,914
- 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.