Case 2304344/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mx Vernon Collins v Brighton & Hove LGBT Switchboard — 2023
- Case reference
- 2304344/2022
- Decision date
- 4 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Abbott Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mx Vernon Collins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal declared, further to the claimant's reference under section 11 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, that the respondent failed to give the claimant pay statements in accordance with section 8 of the Act between January and September 2022.
The judgment records that itemised pay statements were not provided at or before the time wages or salary were paid for each listed monthly payment in that period. Pursuant to section 12(4) of the Act, the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £150.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment adjudicated a reference under sections 11 and 12 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 concerning itemised pay statements. The locked taxonomy has no specific itemised pay statement category, so this is classified as other. | Upheld | — | £150 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £150
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 11 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 12(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 8 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 12(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.