Case 2305100/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Francis v Frys BBQ Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2305100/2021
- Decision date
- 18 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robinson Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Francis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Robinson, sitting at London South Employment Tribunal by video hearing on 18 May 2022, held that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages by failing to pay wages due. The tribunal ordered Frys BBQ Ltd to pay £1,985 net of tax and national insurance for that claim.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages by failing to pay the claimant in lieu of accrued but untaken holiday. It ordered payment of £214.38 net of tax and national insurance in respect of that entitlement.
In addition, the tribunal held that the respondent was in breach of contract for failing to give the claimant the notice to which he was entitled. Damages of £397 were awarded for that claim. The judgment records no separate interest award, and the total monetary award arising from the three heads is £2,596.38 net of tax and national insurance.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages because the respondent failed to pay the claimant's wages. | Upheld | — | £1,985 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages because the respondent failed to pay the claimant in lieu of accrued but untaken holiday. | Upheld | — | £214 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found a breach of contract for failure to give the claimant the notice to which he was entitled. | Upheld | — | £397 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,596
- 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.