Case 2401715/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Pritchard v Chetu Incorporated — 2020
- Case reference
- 2401715/2020
- Decision date
- 26 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Pritchard
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Pritchard was employed by Chetu Incorporated from 13 January 2020 to 21 February 2020 as a National Account Manager on £3,105.50 per month. The tribunal found that he was only informed of dismissal on 21 February 2020, after being locked out of the respondent's systems, so he was available for work that day and entitled to be paid for it. It found an unlawful deduction from wages of £143.33 for that day, and a further unlawful deduction of £167.22 arising from the February salary adjustment, making £310.55 in total under the wages claim.
The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that he had taken 1.5 days' leave and, applying regulation 15A of the Working Time Regulations 1998, held that his first-year entitlement accrued monthly and rounded up to five days. It rejected his argument that weekend travel gave him extra leave. On that basis, and taking account of what had already been paid in the payslips, it found that he had been underpaid holiday pay by £169.13. It also found a breach of contract in relation to expenses because the respondent could not explain the difference between the expenses report and the amount actually paid, and it awarded the outstanding £70.91.
The claimant's request for punitive damages and compensation was not entertained as a substantive remedy: the tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to award punitive damages or compensation on the claims brought. The judgment ordered the respondent to pay the awarded sums within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The award covered one day's pay for 21 February 2020 and a further February salary underpayment; the tribunal found the claimant was available for work on 21 February and was notified of dismissal only that day. | Upheld | — | £311 |
| Breach of contract | Award for unpaid expenses. The tribunal accepted the claimant was contractually entitled to reimbursement and found the respondent could not explain the shortfall between the expenses report and the amount paid. | Upheld | — | £71 |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim under the Working Time Regulations 1998. The tribunal applied regulation 15A, rejected an alleged extra entitlement for weekend travel, and found an underpayment of holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £169 |
| Other | The claimant sought punitive damages and compensation. The tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to award punitive damages or compensation on the claims brought. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £551
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- sections 13-24 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- Regulation 15A of the Working Time Regulations 1998
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.