Case 2401694/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Georgeson v Ben Magson T/A First Construction Safety — 2022
- Case reference
- 2401694/2022
- Decision date
- 1 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Georgeson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr P Georgeson brought claims against Ben Magson T/A First Construction Safety. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge made a determination under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 without a contested hearing. The hearing listed for 18 July 2022 was cancelled.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's unlawful deduction from wages claim and ordered payment of £3,416.67 gross. It also upheld the contractual reimbursement claim and ordered payment of £242.00 for petrol expenses and £330.00 for accommodation, food and travel for January 2022. The judgment states that the respondent must pay £3,988.67 in total.
A separate notice on interest stated that interest would be payable under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 if the award remained unpaid 14 days after the relevant decision day of 1 September 2022. The stipulated interest rate was 8% per annum.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £3,416.67 for an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £3,417 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal ordered £242.00 for unreimbursed petrol expenses and £330.00 for accommodation, food and travel for January 2022. The dispositive text expressly labels the petrol item as breach of contract and then awards the £330 item separately in the same judgment. | Upheld | — | £572 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,989
- 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.