Case 1807856/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Ridall v Art of Smart Group Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1807856/2023
- Decision date
- 8 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Knowles Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Ridall
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 on time and did not appear at the hearing. Employment Judge T Knowles, sitting alone at Leeds by video on 8 April 2024, first substituted Art of Smart Group Limited as the correctly named respondent under rule 34, noting the claim form had been served at the respondent's trading office and re-sent to its registered office.
The Tribunal found the claim of unfair dismissal well founded and awarded a basic award of £3,000.00 and a compensatory award of £3,447.64. It further found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages, requiring payment of £1,020.00 gross, and had failed to pay holiday entitlement, requiring payment of £985.04 gross.
The Tribunal applied a 25% uplift of £2,113.17 on the above awards for the respondent's unreasonable failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Discipline and Grievance Procedures. The element of the unlawful deductions claim relating to pension contributions not paid into the relevant pension fund was held to fall outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction and was directed to be referred to the Pensions Regulator.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Basic award £3,000.00 and compensatory award £3,447.64. Determined under Rule 21 following respondent's failure to present a valid response. | Upheld | — | £6,448 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross amount of £1,020.00 awarded for unauthorised deductions from wages. | Upheld | — | £1,020 |
| Holiday pay | Gross amount of £985.04 awarded for unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £985 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Insofar as the deduction related to pension contributions not paid into the relevant pension fund, the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction; the matter should be referred to the Pensions Regulator. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,566
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,000
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £3,448
- 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.