Case 2204035/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2204035/2023
- Decision date
- 26 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found the complaint of unlawful deduction from wages well-founded and ordered the Respondent to pay compensation. The Claimant gave evidence that he had not been paid for January and February 2023, that his monthly gross pay was £2,333.33, and that he had received £200 from the Respondent after presenting the claim. The Tribunal accepted that evidence.
The Tribunal also found the complaint of non-payment of holiday pay well-founded. It accepted that the Claimant had 12 days of holiday outstanding when he left, calculated using an annual salary of £28,000 and a weekly figure of £538.46. The figures were stated to be gross, with the Respondent permitted to deduct income tax and national insurance if properly accounted for.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states compensation of £4,466.33 for unlawful deduction from wages. The reasons contain a slightly different figure of £4,466.43 for unpaid salary. | Upheld | — | £4,466 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,292 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,759
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.