Case 1803742/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Multiclean Supplies Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1803742/2019
- Decision date
- 29 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Hull
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr Christopher Stringer, claimed unpaid wages, unpaid notice pay and unpaid holiday pay against Multiclean Supplies Ltd, with the respondent title amended to reflect that company. The case was heard at Hull on 27 November 2019 before Employment Judge R S Drake. The respondent did not file a response and did not attend the hearing.
Because there was no ET3 and no attendance from the respondent, the tribunal preferred the claimant's oral evidence. It found that he had been due pay during employment which had not been paid at all, that holiday accrued during employment had not been paid, and that he had been given two weeks' notice but was not required or expected to work that notice period.
The tribunal found no basis for non-payment and, in particular, no formal written agreement signed by the claimant permitting withholding of wages or holiday pay for the periods claimed. It therefore upheld the claims and awarded £1,785.00 for unpaid wages, £274.61 for holiday pay and £255.00 for notice pay, making a total award of £2,314.61.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that unpaid wages of £1,785 were due and had not been paid. | Upheld | — | £1,785 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that he had been given, but not required or expected, to work two weeks' notice and awarded £255 for notice pay. | Upheld | — | £255 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that holiday accrued during employment had not been paid, and awarded £274.61. | Upheld | — | £275 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,315
- 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.