Case 1602372/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Owain Henry Hughes v Seiont Manor Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1602372/2019
- Decision date
- 29 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Owain Henry Hughes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was made under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal's Rules of Procedure 2013 in the absence of an ET3 response form from Seiont Manor Limited. Employment Judge Brace recorded that there was sufficient material before the tribunal to enable a proper determination to be made.
The tribunal upheld Mr Owain Henry Hughes's claims for unpaid wages and notice pay. It awarded unpaid wages in the gross sum of £1,602.06 and notice pay in the net sum of £807.68.
The total award recorded was £2,409.74. The judgment stated that the claimant is responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions that may be due on sums awarded in respect of unpaid wages and unpaid holiday pay, although the itemised upheld claims in the judgment were unpaid wages and notice pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment records this as unpaid wages (gross). | Upheld | — | £1,602 |
| Breach of contract | Judgment records this as notice pay (net); it does not use the phrase wrongful dismissal. | Upheld | — | £808 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,410
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal's 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.