Case 1805931/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Steyert v Ravens Trailers Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1805931/2021
- Decision date
- 10 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Steyert
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was decided on 10 March 2022 at Leeds by CVP video conference under Rule 21, with the respondent not attending. Employment Judge Lancaster recorded that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages, and ordered payment of £5,298.48 gross.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. Damages were assessed at £454.31 gross, using a gross weekly pay figure of £662.31 and deducting 2 days' earnings in mitigation of loss, calculated as 16 hours at £13.00 per hour, being £208.00.
A further finding was made that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. The tribunal ordered £774.90, calculated as 76/365 x 5.6 weeks at £662.31 per week. The total award was £6,527.69.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of £5,298.48 gross. | Upheld | — | £5,298 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £454.31 gross, calculated from a £662.31 gross week's pay less 2 days' earnings in mitigation of loss (16 hours at £13.00 per hour, £208.00). | Upheld | — | £454 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £774.90, calculated as 76/365 x 5.6 weeks at £662.31 per week. | Upheld | — | £775 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,528
- 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.