Case 1801607/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Stephenson v Emplaw Limited T/A Emplaw Solutions Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 1801607/2024
- Decision date
- 26 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Stephenson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Leeds Employment Tribunal on 09 March 2024. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
On liability, the tribunal held that the claims of unfair dismissal, breach of contract (notice pay), failure to pay holiday pay, and unauthorized deductions from wages all succeeded. The judgment records those claims as upheld.
This was a liability-only judgment. The tribunal stated that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled would be determined at a later remedy hearing, and that a separate notice of hearing would be sent.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Liability only judgment; remedy to be determined at a separate remedy hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded as breach of contract (notice pay). Liability only judgment; remedy not yet determined. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded as failure to pay holiday pay. Liability only judgment; remedy not yet determined. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded as unauthorized deductions from wages. Liability only judgment; remedy not yet determined. | 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.