Case 2302162/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Joshua Wilde v SE8 London Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2302162/2023
- Decision date
- 16 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Yardley Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Joshua Wilde
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in London South by CVP on 9 April 2025, Employment Judge Yardley found the Claimant's holiday pay complaint well-founded. The tribunal held that SE8 London Limited failed to pay the Claimant in accordance with regulation 14(2) and/or 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and awarded £750.06. The judgment records that the Claimant is responsible for paying any tax or National Insurance on that award.
The tribunal also found that when proceedings began the Respondent was in breach of its duty to provide the Claimant with a written statement of employment particulars. Applying section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, the tribunal awarded an amount equal to two weeks' gross pay. It found there were no exceptional circumstances making such an award unjust or inequitable.
The tribunal further held that it was not just and equitable to make an award of an amount equal to four weeks' gross pay. The award for the written statement breach was therefore £327.84. The judgment states that the total amount payable by the Respondent to the Claimant was £1,077.91.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the complaint in respect of holiday pay well-founded and said the Respondent failed to pay the Claimant in accordance with regulation 14(2) and/or 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The judgment records that the Claimant is responsible for paying any tax or National Insurance on this award. | Upheld | — | £750 |
| Other | The tribunal found that when the proceedings were begun the Respondent was in breach of its duty to provide the Claimant with a written statement of employment particulars. It awarded an amount equal to two weeks' gross pay under section 38 Employment Act 2002 and said there were no exceptional circumstances making that award unjust or inequitable. | Upheld | — | £328 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,078
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- regulation 14(2) Working Time Regulations 1998
- regulation 16(1) Working Time Regulations 1998
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.