Case 2207420/2021 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v No appearance or — 2022
- Case reference
- 2207420/2021
- Decision date
- 12 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Coen
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response to the claim had been presented, and the Tribunal gave judgment under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The respondent did not appear or have representation at the hearing.
The Tribunal found that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claimant's claim for £518 in unauthorised deductions from wages in March 2020 because the claim was not presented within the applicable time limits, and that claim was dismissed.
The claimant's notice pay claim succeeded, and the respondent was ordered to pay £74.70 as damages for wrongful dismissal. The holiday pay claim also succeeded, and the respondent was ordered to pay a gross sum of £414.40 for unpaid holiday pay on termination of employment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction to consider the £518 claim for unauthorised deductions from wages in March 2020 because it was not presented within the applicable time limits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The notice pay claim succeeded and the award was described as damages for wrongful dismissal. | Upheld | — | £75 |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay claim related to the period between June 2020 and May 2021 and was awarded as a gross sum for unpaid holiday pay on termination. | Upheld | — | £414 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £489
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 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.