Case 2302366/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Burgar v Newstreet Motorcycles Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2302366/2022
- Decision date
- 30 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barker Representatives
- Venue
- Croydon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Burgar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr G Burgar was employed by Newstreet Motorcycles Limited as a senior motorcycle mechanic from 4 January 2022 until dismissal on 30 May 2022. The tribunal found that the contract terms written by the respondent, including a month's notice, were accepted by both parties even though neither had signed the document. It rejected the respondent's argument that the unsigned contract was ineffective and found there was no waiver of notice and no credible gross misconduct that would justify summary dismissal.
The tribunal found that on 30 May 2022 Mr Ticehurst summoned the claimant into the office and confirmed he was being dismissed before any proper discussion took place, then required him to return his keys. It rejected the respondent's case that the claimant walked out or refused to work his notice period, and held that the dismissal took immediate effect. On that basis, the claimant recovered one month's notice pay of £2,333.33 gross and 4 days' untaken holiday pay of £430.80 gross.
On holiday, the tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to 28 days per year under the Working Time Regulations 1998, accrued 11 days over the period worked, and had taken 7 days including 4 days' leave and 3 bank holidays. It rejected the respondent's attempt to reclassify short absences and weather-related or medical time off as holiday after the dispute arose.
The claimant was also allowed to amend the claim to add a workplace pension issue. Applying Selkent Bus Company Limited v Moore [1996] ICR 836 and Vaughan v Modality Partnership UKEAT/0147/20/BA, the tribunal held the amendment should be permitted. It found the respondent was obliged under the Pensions Act 2008 to auto-enrol and contribute because the claimant was under state pension age and earned above the threshold. The judgment's opening order records £263.55 gross for the pension element, while the reasons later calculate £326.40; no interest was awarded, save that the order states none would be payable if sums were paid within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | One month's notice pay. The tribunal held the unsigned contract was valid because both parties accepted and worked on its terms, and it rejected the respondent's case that the claimant waived notice or was guilty of gross misconduct. | Upheld | — | £2,333 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued but untaken holiday pay. The tribunal found the claimant worked from 4 January 2022 to 30 May 2022, accrued 11 days' leave, took 7 days, and was owed 4 days' pay. | Upheld | — | £431 |
| Other | Workplace pension complaint added by amendment. The operative order at the start of the judgment records £263.55 gross, but the reasons at paragraphs 44-45 calculate £326.40 for six months of 3% contributions, so the judgment is internally inconsistent on this figure. | Upheld | — | £264 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,028
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Selkent Bus Company Limited v Moore [1996] ICR 836
- Vaughan v Modality Partnership UKEAT/0147/20/BA
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.