Case 2207870/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Mark Wilson v AAqua Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2207870/2022
- Decision date
- 6 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Mark Wilson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to attend the hearing or defend the claim issued on 11 October 2022. The tribunal did not postpone the hearing, refused an extension of time to defend, and determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages by failing to pay wages for August 2022, and ordered payment of £5,900 net. It also found that the respondent was in breach of contract by terminating the claimant's employment without notice, and ordered £7,115.38 gross in damages.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages for August 2022 and ordered payment of £5,900 net. | Upheld | — | £5,900 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found breach of contract for termination without notice and ordered damages of £7,115.38 gross. | Upheld | — | £7,115 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,015
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 rule 21
- Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 rule 30A(2)
- Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 rule 20
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.