Case 2300185/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr O Day v Mr Daniel Potts and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 2300185/2020
- Decision date
- 13 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Andrews Dated
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr O Day
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the first Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant's wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £576. It also found that the first Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,612.80.
The Claimant's claim in respect of a replacement licence was dismissed because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear that claim. The claims against the second Respondent were also dismissed because she was not the Claimant's employer at the relevant time. The total sums ordered against the first Respondent were therefore £2,188.80.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £576 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,613 |
| Other | The claim for a replacement licence was dismissed because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claims against the second Respondent were dismissed because she was not the Claimant's employer at the relevant time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,189
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.