Case 2201699/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Claimant v York Investments Ltd — 2020

Case reference: 2201699/2020
Decision date: 16 December 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge E Burns DEFAULT

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Respondent

York Investments Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

York Investments Ltd did not file an ET3 Grounds of Resistance. Employment Judge E Burns therefore entered judgment under Rule 21 without a hearing, and the listed hearing on 17 December 2020 did not take place.

The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant her correct wages, causing an unlawful deduction of £1,765.27, and had failed to pay correct holiday pay, causing an unlawful deduction of £296.87. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay £459.76 in lieu of notice.

In addition, the tribunal found failures to provide a written statement of employment particulars contrary to s.1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and itemised pay statements contrary to s.8 of that Act. It ordered the respondent to pay £2,521.91 gross and a further £1,839.04, described as four weeks' pay under s.38 of the Employment Act 2002, within 14 days of the judgment.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay the claimant her correct wages. Paragraph 4 records £2,521.91 gross for the first three payment items; the figures listed in paragraph 3.1 to 3.3 total £2,521.90.	Upheld	—	£1,765
Holiday pay	Recorded from the judgment.	Upheld	—	£297
Breach of contract	Recorded from the judgment.	Upheld	—	£460
Other	The tribunal found that the respondent failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars contrary to s.1 ERA 1996 and itemised pay statements contrary to s.8 ERA 1996, and it ordered four weeks' pay under s.38 of the Employment Act 2002.	Upheld	—	£1,839

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £4,361; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

4 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.