Case 2203264/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Radcliffe v YOLO London Ltd and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 2203264/2020
- Decision date
- 1 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smailes
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr R Radcliffe
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr R Radcliffe was employed as head chef under a written contract with The Commissary Kitchen Limited from 9 December 2019. The tribunal found that later paperwork naming YOLO Ltd / YOLO LTD(HWH), together with furlough-related emails and WhatsApp messages, did not show a legal transfer of employment to YOLO London Limited. It held that there was no notified change of employer and that Mr Radcliffe remained employed by The Commissary Kitchen Limited throughout, so the claim against YOLO London Limited was dismissed.
The tribunal found that Mr Radcliffe was not given notice on 22 March 2020 when the Haymarket Wine House closed. Although the respondents continued to pursue furlough registration through April and May 2020, the tribunal held that the employment did not end until 15 May 2020, when the HR consultant emailed notice with immediate effect and the claimant received a P45 showing 23 March 2020 as the termination date. It found that he was summarily dismissed without notice, although he had already been paid one week’s pay in lieu of notice and accrued holiday pay.
On the deduction claim, the tribunal found there was no written agreement to vary pay to 80% of wages, despite the WhatsApp message sent to employees on 27 March 2020. It concluded that the claimant had been paid only up to 22 March 2020 and was unpaid for 23 March 2020 to 15 May 2020. Applying section 13 ERA 1996, section 23 ERA 1996 and section 86 ERA 1996, it calculated the sum due on a gross basis at 7 weeks and 5 days at £596.00 per week, totalling £4,585.11. The tribunal noted that no further amount was due in respect of notice because pay in lieu had already been made, and that the second respondent said it had no funds to pay the award.
Claims and outcomes
2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim against the first respondent, YOLO London Limited, was dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant remained employed by the second respondent at all material times. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim against the second respondent, The Commissary Kitchen Limited, was upheld. The tribunal found wages were unpaid from 23 March 2020 to 15 May 2020 and ordered payment of £4,585.11 gross. | Upheld | — | £4,585 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,585
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA 1996
- s.86 ERA 1996
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.