Case 2300845/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Le v Viet Anh UK Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2300845/2020
- Decision date
- 20 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Le
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 default judgment. The tribunal recorded that the respondent had failed to present a response within the time limit set out in Rule 16, and judgment was therefore entered in the claimant's favour against Viet Anh UK Limited.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Mr D Le the gross sum of £162 in respect of holiday pay. The judgment states that the claimant is to account to HMRC, indicating the award was made gross.
The tribunal also made a declaration that the respondent failed to provide the claimant with an itemised pay statement. No separate financial award was stated for that declaration in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Rule 21 judgment entered in the claimant's favour after the respondent failed to present a response in time. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay a gross sum of £162 in respect of holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £162 |
| Other | The tribunal also declared that the respondent failed to provide the claimant with an itemised pay statement. No separate monetary award was stated for this declaration. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £162
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £162
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.