Case 2218522/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C McPartlin v Ingredients, Supplements and Methods Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2218522/2024
- Decision date
- 10 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C McPartlin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Respondent failed to file an ET3. Employment Judge E Burns considered the ET1 and documents provided by the Claimant and decided that the claim could be determined without a hearing under Rule 21.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent unlawfully failed to pay the Claimant wages between 1 January and 5 March 2024, three months' notice, and holiday pay. The Claimant was earning GBP 9,000 gross per month and was owed 4.5 days' holiday pay based on his annual entitlement.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the Respondent unlawfully failed to pay wages between 1 January and 5 March 2024, but does not split the total award by claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the Respondent failed to pay three months' notice, but does not split the total award by claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the Respondent failed to pay 4.5 days' holiday pay, but does not split the total award by claim. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £48,107
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.