Case 2304440/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Braden v AFD Pubs Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2304440/2019
- Decision date
- 3 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sage Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Braden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remote hearing on the papers, held by telephone and not objected to by the parties. The tribunal recorded that a face-to-face hearing was not practicable and that the quantum issues could be determined remotely. It also stated that, apart from a detailed schedule of loss dated 2 July 2020, it was not referred to any documents.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £172.41. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,272.55. The judgment records no other liability findings or separate reasoning beyond those orders.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £172.41. | Upheld | — | £172 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,272.55. | Upheld | — | £1,273 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,445
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.