Case 2205081/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Noyon Environmental Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2205081/2019
- Decision date
- 19 February 2020
- 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. A respondent representative emailed the tribunal on 19 February 2020 asking for the hearing to be postponed because of a chest infection, but no medical evidence was provided. The judge recorded that the respondent knew of the hearing, had not filed a defence, and was not permitted to participate in the proceedings.
The tribunal determined the claim on the papers under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, without a hearing. It found that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages, holiday pay and notice pay to the claimant.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £833.33 for wages, £866.66 for holiday pay, and £433.33 for notice pay. It also directed the respondent to account to HMRC for any tax and National Insurance due. The listed hearing for 20 February 2020 did not take place because judgment had been given.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states the respondent unlawfully failed to pay wages and orders payment of £833.33 for wages. No separate statutory basis is specified in the text. | Upheld | — | £833 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment orders payment of £866.66 for holiday pay. The text does not expressly identify whether this was treated under the Working Time Regulations or as a contractual claim. | Upheld | — | £867 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment orders payment of £433.33 for notice pay. The text does not label the legal basis, so breach of contract is the nearest enum fit. | Upheld | — | £433 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,133
- 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.