Case 2301510/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H McNally v TSS Facilities Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301510/2022
- Decision date
- 12 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr H McNally
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 5 May 2022. The respondent indicated that it did not intend to defend the claim, and the Employment Judge therefore determined the case under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered it to pay £586.35 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £280.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant's separate request for £40 for the cost of five black t-shirts, purchased because of a lack of uniform, was not a claim that could be determined under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and therefore failed. The tribunal stated that the total payable to the claimant was £866.35, and the hearing listed for 30 November 2022 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £586.35 gross. | Upheld | — | £586 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £280. | Upheld | — | £280 |
| Other | The £40 claim for five black t-shirts, said to have been purchased because of a lack of uniform, was held not to be a claim that could be determined under the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £866
- 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.