Case 2402005/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G E Beaumont v The Coal Room Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2402005/2022
- Decision date
- 14 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G E Beaumont
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so Employment Judge Phil Allen determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. On that basis, the tribunal entered judgment without a contested hearing and found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr Beaumont's wages, ordering payment of the gross sum of £2,073.13.
The tribunal also found that Mr Beaumont was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £365.38. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £482.30.
The total monetary award recorded in the judgment was £2,920.81. The accompanying notice stated that interest would be payable under Article 12 of the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 if the sums were not paid within 14 days of the relevant decision day, with 14 December 2022 identified as the relevant decision day and 15 December 2022 as the calculation day.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,073 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal was found to be in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £365 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment says the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £482 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,921
- 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.