Case 2300908/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr P Burridge (Director) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2300908/2020
- Decision date
- 9 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Webster Appearances
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the London South Employment Tribunal hearing on 9 February 2021 before Employment Judge Webster, the tribunal upheld the claimant’s claims against Boxed Freeze Ltd for notice pay, unlawful deductions from wages, holiday pay, and failure to provide a written statement of terms. The unlawful deduction award covered unpaid wages and employee pension contributions. All amounts were expressed in gross terms.
The tribunal did not uphold the claims against Coolertech Ltd because it was not the claimant’s employer. Boxed Freeze Ltd was ordered to pay £216 for notice pay, £1,080 for unpaid wages, £216 for holiday pay, £252.72 for pension contribution deductions, and £864 for failure to provide a written statement of terms, making a total of £2,628.72. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and written reasons were available only if requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay was awarded against Boxed Freeze Ltd. | Upheld | — | £216 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The award covered unpaid wages (£1,080) and unauthorised deductions in respect of employee pension contributions (£252.72). | Upheld | — | £1,333 |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay was included in the remedy schedule and awarded against Boxed Freeze Ltd. | Upheld | — | £216 |
| Other | Failure to provide a written statement of terms, recorded as contrary to s1 Employment Rights Act 1996 and s38 ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £864 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,629
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s38 ERA 1996
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.