Case 2302684/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person ( left the hearing after 40 minutes ) Hungarian Interpreter: Ms Lyubov Karalvanova For the v Ms Georgia Roberts, Solicitor — 2020
- Case reference
- 2302684/2019
- Decision date
- 9 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Balogun Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person ( left the hearing after 40 minutes ) Hungarian Interpreter: Ms Lyubov Karalvanova For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented a claim on 20 May 2019, which was clarified at a preliminary hearing on 16 September 2020 as a claim for unpaid wages. At that hearing the respondent named in the claim form was replaced by Poundland Limited, which was found to be the claimant's employer. The claimant attended the final hearing with a Hungarian interpreter but left after about 15 to 20 minutes; the tribunal then continued in her absence and heard evidence from Danielle Merritt, Regional HR Manager for the respondent.
The claimant's case was that she had been paid either £800 or £900 a month but should have been paid £1,600 because she worked 14 hours a day and did overtime. The tribunal found that she was employed as a Sales Assistant from 29 October 2018 to 8 May 2019, contracted to work 12 hours a week, although she often worked overtime. Her starting rate was £7.83 per hour and this increased to £8.21 by the time her employment ended. Overtime was paid at the basic hourly rate, and nightshift work between 11pm and 5am was paid at 1.33 times the hourly rate.
The tribunal accepted the respondent's documentary evidence, including the claimant's payslips covering the whole period of employment. It found that the total hours worked were 512.79 and that the claimant's total gross pay was £5,339.02. The tribunal noted that the claimant had produced no evidence challenging the accuracy of those figures, and it was satisfied from the documents that the sums paid in each pay period corresponded with the hours worked.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the claim for arrears of pay had not been made out and dismissed the unlawful deduction of wages claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was clarified at a preliminary hearing as a claim for unpaid wages. The tribunal found the claimant had not proved arrears of pay and dismissed the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.