Case 2400020/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Mockl v Simpson Furniture (Bury) Limited and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400020/2023
- Decision date
- 10 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr S Mockl
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claim on 6 September 2024 before Employment Judge M Butler sitting alone in Manchester. The respondents did not attend. The tribunal first determined that the second respondent, Simpson Interiors Limited, was the correct employing entity, and dismissed all claims brought against the first respondent in their entirety.
On the substantive claims against the second respondent, the tribunal found that unlawful deductions had been made from the claimant's wages totalling £9,558.64, comprising unpaid monthly wages for November 2022, December 2022 and January 2023 (£2,166.67 each), £1,000 in unpaid wages for February 2022, £1,300 in unpaid holiday pay on termination (13 days), and £758.63 in unpaid commission calculated per contract. The tribunal also found the second respondent had breached the contract of employment in respect of contractual notice (£6,500.01 for the 3-month notice period) and employment expenses (£503.90), totalling £7,003.91.
The tribunal applied a 10% ACAS uplift to both the unlawful deductions award (£955.86) and the breach of contract award (£700.39), on the basis that the claimant and others had raised pay issues with the second respondent who made no attempt to resolve the matter. The total award payable by the second respondent was £18,218.80. Other matters in the schedule of loss were found to be outside the tribunal's jurisdiction and no further awards were made.
Claims and outcomes
8 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Award of £9,558.64 for unpaid wages (Nov 2022, Dec 2022, Jan 2023, Feb 2022), unpaid holiday pay on termination (£1,300/13 days), and unpaid commission (£758.63), with a 10% ACAS uplift of £955.86 for the second respondent's failure to engage with the claimant's pay issues. Claims against the first respondent were dismissed; second respondent was the correct employer. | Upheld | — | £10,515 |
| Breach of contract | Award of £6,500.01 for contractual notice pay (3 months) and £503.90 for employment expenses, totalling £7,003.91, plus a 10% ACAS uplift of £700.39. Claims against the first respondent were dismissed; the second respondent was found to be the correct employer. | Upheld | — | £7,704 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | All claims brought against the first respondent (Simpson Furniture (Bury) Limited) were dismissed in their entirety as the second respondent was found to be the correct employing entity. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | All claims brought against the first respondent (Simpson Furniture (Bury) Limited) were dismissed in their entirety as the second respondent was found to be the correct employing entity. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £18,219
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- ACAS code of practice
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.