Mr S Sangster v Honest Burgers Limited — 2022

The respondent did not file an ET3 or attend the hearing. After repeated service attempts and correspondence with Ms Sandbach, Employment Judge Norris proceeded in the respondent's absence under Rule 47 and entered default judgment under Rule 21. A later email asking the claim to be "thrown out" did not alter the position because there had been no response, no extension application, and no explanation for the delay in presenting a defence.

Mr Sangster worked as a waiter from 7 November 2021 until his dismissal effective 12 February 2022. He gave unchallenged evidence that he was required to work after 11 pm and until midnight despite his college commitments and statutory limits, and that when he raised concerns about rest breaks and night work he was dismissed. The tribunal held that this amounted to a provision, criterion or practice placing workers of his age group at a particular disadvantage contrary to section 19 Equality Act 2010, and that the respondent failed to show that it did not contravene that provision. It also found that he was dismissed because he asserted statutory rights about working hours, contrary to section 104(4)(d) Employment Rights Act 1996.

On remedy, the tribunal accepted his evidence about the impact on his health, studies, confidence and finances, while recording that he said he had not been subjected to a campaign of harassment or discrimination. It awarded £8,500 for injury to feelings, described as the top of the lower Vento band or the bottom of the middle band, £2,508 for six months' loss of earnings after dismissal, and £152 for unpaid guaranteed hours at £9.50 an hour. The payments award was treated as a breach of contract claim under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1994, and the total award was £11,160, payable without deduction.