Case 1807216/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Emerald Property Group Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1807216/2020
- Decision date
- 7 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remote video hearing on 7 April 2021 before Employment Judge R S Drake. The respondent did not attend or make representations, so the tribunal relied on the claimant's evidence and accepted his schedule of loss. The claimant was found to have worked as a joiner from 1 September 2019 to 31 July 2020, and the tribunal found he had not been given a written statement of particulars of employment.
The tribunal upheld the holiday pay claim and awarded £507.69 for five days' holiday pay under reg. 16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. It also upheld the claim for unpaid wages under s.13 ERA 1996 and awarded £479.00 for a shortfall arising from non-payment in March, April and May 2020. In addition, it upheld the common law breach of contract claim and awarded £2,369.59 for consequential losses, including a loan repayment and unpaid pension contributions.
Finally, the tribunal found the failure to provide written particulars was deliberate and made an award under ss.1 and 11 ERA 1996 with a 25% uplift under s.38 Employment Act 2002, stating a head of award of £2,538.36. The judgment's component figures do not fully reconcile arithmetically, but the order states a total sum payable of £5,874.73.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay awarded under reg. 16 WTR 1998; the reasons also describe the same sum as an unlawful deduction from pay. | Upheld | — | £508 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid wages for March to May 2020; the tribunal found a shortfall after crediting sums already received. | Upheld | — | £479 |
| Breach of contract | Consequential losses for breach of contract were allowed, including a loan repayment and unpaid pension contributions. The reasons contain a minor inconsistency in the employee pension figure, but the award is stated as £2,369.59. | Upheld | — | £2,370 |
| Other | Failure to provide written particulars of employment under ss.1 and 11 ERA 1996; the tribunal found the omission deliberate and applied a 25% uplift under s.38 Employment Act 2002. The component figures in the reasons do not reconcile exactly, but the head of award is stated as £2,538.36. | Upheld | — | £2,538 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,875
- 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.