Case 1803770/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Hunter v JEM Trading (uk) Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1803770/2020
- Decision date
- 31 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Hunter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment against JEM Trading (UK) Ltd. The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of the gross amount due, stated as £1,531.39.
The tribunal also found that the respondent failed to comply with the obligation to give the claimant a statement of employment particulars required by Part 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Pursuant to section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, the respondent was ordered to pay two weeks' wages, stated as £1,033.84.
Paragraph 3 states that £2,547.23 was to be paid to the claimant on or before 31 August 2020. The extracted figures in the judgment do not arithmetically reconcile exactly, so that total is recorded as stated in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The respondent was ordered to pay £1,531.39 as the gross amount due for unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,531 |
| Other | The judgment found a failure to give the claimant a statement of employment particulars under Part 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and ordered payment of two weeks' wages, stated as £1,033.84. The judgment also states that £2,547.23 shall be paid in total, although that figure does not arithmetically match the two amounts in paragraphs 1 and 2 as extracted. | Upheld | — | £1,034 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,547
- 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.