Case 2300978/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Allegis Group Ltd T/a Aerotek Staffing — 2022
- Case reference
- 2300978/2022
- Decision date
- 24 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Emery sat alone at London Central on 22 August 2022. The respondent did not appear or file a defence. The tribunal first resolved the employer's identity point, concluding that the claimant's employer was Allegis Group Limited trading as Aerotek Staffing, based on the employment contract, message trail, induction documents and Companies House material. It noted that the respondent had used a trading name, and relied on Mist v Derby Community NHS Trust when deciding that it was in the interests of justice for the hearing to proceed.
The claimant had worked from 12 January 2022 to 1 February 2022, for 22 days, on a salary of £23,500 per year. The tribunal accepted that he had carried out work during that period but had not been paid for any of the days worked, and had also not received notice pay. It recorded that the employment ended by email on 1 February 2022, with the reason given that he had not completed internal documentation properly, and that the contract provided for 30 days' notice and no probation clause.
The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed on withdrawal. The claims for unlawful deduction from wages and breach of contract succeeded under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and on the alternative contractual basis identified in the reasons. The tribunal calculated unpaid wages during employment at £1,998.80 and notice pay at £1,958.33, and awarded £3,957.00 in total. The judgment does not split that total between the two successful heads of claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal at the hearing. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the claimant had not been paid wages during employment or for the notice period. The award was not split between this claim and the breach of contract claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Alternative basis for the same unpaid wages and notice pay. The contract provided for 30 days' notice and no probation clause, and the award was not split between this claim and the unlawful deduction claim. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,957
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 Employment Rights Act 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.