Case 1807855/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Lloyd v Art of Smart Group Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1807855/2023
- Decision date
- 8 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Knowles Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Lloyd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because the respondent failed to present a valid response in time and did not appear at the hearing on 8 April 2024. Employment Judge T Knowles substituted Art of Smart Group Limited as the correctly named respondent under Rule 34, noting the claim form had been served at the trading office and re-sent to the registered office.
The tribunal found that the claim of unfair dismissal was well founded and succeeded, awarding a basic award of £1,200.00 and a compensatory award of £493.21. It also found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £790.00 gross, and that the respondent had failed to pay holiday entitlement, ordering payment of £540.00 gross.
For the unreasonable failure of the respondent to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Discipline and Grievance Procedures, the tribunal ordered a 25% uplift on the above awards amounting to £620.80. The aspect of the unlawful deductions claim concerning pension contributions deducted from wages but not paid into the relevant pension fund was held to be outside the tribunal's jurisdiction and was referred to the Pensions Regulator.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Basic award of £1,200.00 and compensatory award of £493.21 awarded under Rule 21 determination following respondent's failure to present a valid response. | Upheld | — | £1,693 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross amount of £790.00 ordered. A separate aspect concerning pension contributions deducted but not paid into the pension fund was not determined as the tribunal held it lacked jurisdiction and should be referred to the Pensions Regulator. | Upheld | — | £790 |
| Holiday pay | Gross amount of £540.00 ordered for unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £540 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,644
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,200
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £493
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 34 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- ACAS Code of Practice on Discipline and Grievance Procedures
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.