Case 1807119/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Bentley v Meddo Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1807119/2019
- Decision date
- 3 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cox Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Bentley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal granted the claimant leave to amend his claim to add claims for expenses incurred in 2017 and 2018 and for unauthorised deduction from wages relating to pension contributions.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of the claimant's November 2019 salary and car allowance, and in respect of pension contributions. It also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract as to notice, and that the respondent breached the contract by failing to reimburse expenses.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment, and that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. The listed hearing on 6 February 2020 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment awards £3,999.99 for salary and car allowance for November 2019 and £3,128.25 for pension contributions under unauthorised deductions from wages. | Upheld | — | £7,128 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £11,000 |
| Breach of contract | This award relates to reimbursement of expenses. | Upheld | — | £14,505 |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £4,725 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £2,538 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £39,897
- 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.