Case 1804170/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v The Devarmsmiddlehandley Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1804170/2022
- Decision date
- 14 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Neill Appearance
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not attend the hearing, and the tribunal proceeded in its absence under Rule 47. The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that he had been employed by The Devarmsmiddlehandley Ltd as a management accountant from 3 June 2021 to 3 June 2022, that his net weekly wage was £406.94 and gross weekly wage £528.85, and that he was entitled to be paid until the effective date of termination. It also accepted that the claimant had only been given an email confirming his start date and salary, and no written statement of employment particulars, although he said the absence of such a statement mainly made some matters, such as holidays, more difficult rather than causing major problems.
On the wages claim, the tribunal found a breach of s.13 ERA 1996 because the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's final week's wages. It awarded £406.94 net pay for the week ending 3 June 2022. On the written particulars issue, the tribunal found that the claimant had not been provided with the statement required by s.1 ERA 1996 and, under s.38 Employment Act 2002, increased the award by two weeks' gross pay. It explained that it used the lower rate because the claimant had not shown any particular circumstances justifying a higher award. The total compensation awarded was £1,464.64.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay wages properly payable for the week ending 3 June 2022, and that the shortfall was £406.94 net pay. | Upheld | — | £407 |
| Other | The tribunal found that the claimant had not been provided with a written statement of employment particulars required by s.1 ERA 1996 and made an additional award under s.38 Employment Act 2002. It fixed the award at the lower rate, two weeks' gross pay, because no particular circumstances were evidenced. The judgment records the claimant's notice as given on 20 May 2020, which appears inconsistent with the 3 June 2022 termination date. | Upheld | — | £1,058 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,465
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 47
- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.1 ERA 1996
- s.38 Employment Act 2002
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.