Case 2204158/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. R. Fernando v Clear Vision Commercial Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2204158/2021
- Decision date
- 12 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. R. Fernando
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not file an ET3 Grounds of Resistance. Under Rule 21, Regional Employment Judge Wade considered the ET1 and decided the claim could be determined without a hearing.
The tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay the claimant wages owed to him. It ordered Clear Vision Commercial Ltd to pay a total of £29,204.69.
The judgment set out the unpaid sums as £4,198.67 for March 2021, £4,172.67 for April 2021, and £4,166.67 for each of May, June, July, August and September 2021. The tribunal also ordered the respondent to account to HMRC for tax and national insurance due on the award and amended the claim to include the August and September sums sought after the claim was lodged in July 2021.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment finding that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages owed to the claimant. The award was not apportioned by legal head of claim; the tribunal listed unpaid wages by month from March 2021 to September 2021. | Upheld | — | £29,205 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £29,205
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunal Rules 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.