Case 2401221/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Scurrah v Ashton Construction (UK) Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2401221/2020
- Decision date
- 8 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Scurrah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment by Employment Judge Batten in the case of Mr R Scurrah v Ashton Construction (UK) Limited. 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 £2,894.31.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of a further gross sum of £694.31. The written judgment includes the standard notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 stating that sums unpaid within 14 days of the relevant decision day would carry interest at 8%, with the relevant decision day recorded as 8 July 2020 and the calculation day as 9 July 2020, but no separate interest amount is stated in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £2,894.31. | Upheld | — | £2,894 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of the gross sum of £694.31. | Upheld | — | £694 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,589
- 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.