Case 2305257/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M O’Brien v Fry’s BBQ Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2305257/2021
- Decision date
- 16 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hart REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M O’Brien
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Hart, sitting at London South via CVP, upheld two claims brought by Mr M O’Brien against Fry’s BBQ Limited. The tribunal found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction of wages by failing to pay the claimant wages between 17 June 2021 and 27 July 2021. It ordered the respondent to pay £1,670 gross in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also found that the respondent was in breach of contract when it dismissed the claimant without paying the notice to which he was entitled. It ordered payment of £400 gross for that breach. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction of wages because the respondent failed to pay wages between 17 June 2021 and 27 July 2021. | Upheld | — | £1,670 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of contract by dismissing the claimant without paying notice pay to which he was entitled. | Upheld | — | £400 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,070
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.