Case 2402521/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Okonkwo v Rating and Valuation Company Ltd FINAL HEARING — 2020
- Case reference
- 2402521/2020
- Decision date
- 6 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Okonkwo
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs S Okonkwo attended the final hearing by video conference at Manchester on 26 October 2020, but neither party was present or represented, so the tribunal proceeded under rule 47. The tribunal recorded that she was interviewed on 11 February 2020, offered employment immediately, and started work on 12 February 2020. Her statutory statement of employment particulars and payslip showed a salary of £16,000 per annum, hours of 8.45am to 5.00pm Monday to Friday, and a payroll date of the 10th of each month in arrears.
The respondent dismissed the claimant summarily on 28 February 2020 for cumulative misconduct reasons, including attendance and time-keeping, under-performance, attitude, and inability to take management directions. On the notice issue, the tribunal held that both under the contract and the statutory notice provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996, she was not entitled to notice or pay in lieu of notice during the first month of employment. That complaint was therefore not well-founded.
On wages, the tribunal found that the claimant had worked 13 days, was not entitled to be paid before 10 March 2020, and that the respondent had sent a cheque which was not received before making payment by bank transfer once advised. The tribunal found no breach of contract in that payment process. It also found the claimant had been paid on an hourly basis, with proper deductions of 3.5 hours for lateness or non-attendance and 5 hours for unpaid leave.
The tribunal said the payment of £771.27 gross, or £701.48 net, comfortably exceeded the amount it would have calculated on the material before it. It was therefore unable to find any unlawful deduction from wages or non-payment of wages due, and the claim was dismissed in full. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant was paid for the hours worked, with deductions of 3.5 hours for lateness or non-attendance and 5 hours unpaid leave, and was unable to find any unlawful deduction from wages or non-payment of wages due. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held the claimant was not entitled to notice or payment in lieu of notice during the first month of employment and said that, if necessary, it would have found the summary dismissal lawful and not a wrongful dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 47
- Employment Rights Act 1996
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.