Case 1800590/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Richardson v R A Stores (Bradford) Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1800590/2020
- Decision date
- 9 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Richardson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment heard by telephone on 9 June 2020 before Employment Judge Shepherd. The respondent did not appear and no valid response had been presented. On the claimant's submissions and the material before the tribunal, the judge was satisfied that the claims could be determined without a hearing and that the claims succeeded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Rule 21 judgment; the claim succeeded but no monetary award was quantified in this judgment. Remedy was to be determined later if sufficient information was provided. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Described in the judgment as outstanding holiday pay; liability was found, but no amount was assessed in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records this claim as succeeding, but the amount was not determined at this stage. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Failure to provide written statements of particulars of employment. The judgment states that an award will be made under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.