Case 2301625/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Hunt v Rapid Repairz Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301625/2023
- Decision date
- 9 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Hunt
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 11 April 2023 and the respondent did not present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 without a contested hearing.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's wage-related complaint and found that Rapid Repairz Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from Mr D Hunt's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay £2,333.00 gross in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also upheld the claim concerning holiday entitlement, finding that the respondent had failed to pay holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £347.83 for that element, making a total award of £2,680.83. The hearing listed for 19 October 2023 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 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 £2,333.00 gross. | Upheld | — | £2,333 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £347.83. | Upheld | — | £348 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,681
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.