Case 2400076/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Watson v Carlisle Taxi Hire Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2400076/2022
- Decision date
- 31 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Watson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 5 January 2022. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined that a decision could properly be made under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The hearing listed for 22 June 2022 was cancelled.
The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay the claimant in lieu of accrued but untaken holiday entitlement. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £1,274.
The judgment also directed that any gross sums for unauthorised deductions from wages are to be paid subject to the appropriate deductions for tax and national insurance, if any, for which the respondent must account to HMRC. The accompanying interest notice stated that unpaid sums may carry interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, with the relevant judgment day recorded as 31 May 2022 and the calculation day as 1 June 2022.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant in lieu of accrued but untaken holiday entitlement, which it described as an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £1,274 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,274
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990
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.