Case 2202406/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Roar Marketing Services Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2202406/2019
- Decision date
- 12 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JL Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not file ET3 Grounds of Resistance. Employment Judge JL Wade therefore determined the claim on the ET1 without a hearing under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages to the claimant, Mr S Hills. The judgment records no further factual findings or legal analysis beyond that conclusion.
The tribunal ordered Roar Marketing Services Ltd to pay £1,000 gross to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment; respondent did not file ET3 grounds of resistance. Tribunal found the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages and ordered £1,000 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,000
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.