Case 2302335/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J McCarron v James Major/Circle Automation Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2302335/2019
- Decision date
- 8 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J McCarron
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued by Employment Judge Wright Date on 8 September 2020. The claimant, Mr J McCarron, brought claims against James Major/Circle Automation Limited. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £1,903.88 as a gross/net sum.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £432.70. In a further claim, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £216.35. The total of the sums ordered was £2,552.93.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross/net sum of £1,903.88. | Upheld | — | £1,904 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and was awarded damages of £432.70. | Upheld | — | £433 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that holiday entitlement had not been paid and ordered payment of £216.35. | Upheld | — | £216 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,553
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.