Case 1801185/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Elliott Fox v Buttergrove Housing Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801185/2023
- Decision date
- 5 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Elliott Fox
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent filed no response and did not attend the hearing. The claimant, assisted by his mother, gave evidence that the tribunal accepted as unchallenged, persuasive and cogent. On that evidence, the tribunal found that he had worked 13 days between 28 November 2022 and 14 December 2022.
The tribunal found that the claimant had not been paid for 109 hours worked, covering eleven days at 9 hours per day, one day at 2 hours, and one day at 8 hours. Although there was little evidence about the wage agreement, the tribunal found there was sufficient evidence to conclude that the claimant was entitled to be paid at the apprentice rate of PS6.83 per hour.
Applying section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal held that there had been an unlawful withholding of wages. It awarded the claimant PS744.47 for unpaid wages for the period 28 November 2022 to 14 December 2022, and the claim succeeded to that extent.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unlawful withholding of 13 days' pay contrary to section 13 ERA 1996 for 28 November 2022 to 14 December 2022. | Upheld | — | £744 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £744
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 13 ERA 1996
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.