Case 1802546/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v E3 Recruitment Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1802546/2021
- Decision date
- 20 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Drake Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim concerned alleged shortfalls in pay contrary to Regulation 5 of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 during the claimant's assignment to the respondent's customer, Powell (UK) Ltd, from 27 July 2020 to 28 May 2021. The hearing on 3 September 2021 was listed as a preliminary hearing by telephone for case management, but the tribunal recorded that one issue had been resolved for the period 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2021.
For that period, the respondent accepted that it owed an additional payment for agency worker pay at a shortfall rate of £0.75 per hour for 497.75 hours worked. The tribunal recorded that the respondent consented to judgment in that sum to dispose of one issue, with the balance of the claim remaining to be established separately. The operative judgment awards the claimant £348.45.
The written reasons contain an internal inconsistency in paragraph 3, which refers to a total sum of £3458.45, but the judgment itself repeatedly states the award as £348.45. On the face of the decision, the tribunal made partial judgment only for that amount and expressly noted that it was without prejudice to the balance of the claim if later established.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agency worker regulations | The judgment records a partial judgment by consent for an Agency Workers Regulations 2010 Regulation 5 shortfall covering 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2021. Paragraph 3 contains an apparent arithmetic inconsistency, referring to a total sum of £3458.45, but the operative award in paragraphs 1 and 4 is £348.45. | Upheld | — | £348 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £348
- 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.