Case 2402535/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr William Fuller v Creative Developers Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2402535/2023
- Decision date
- 27 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ficklin REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr William Fuller
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Ficklin heard the case at Manchester by CVP on 24 April 2023. The tribunal found that Mr William Fuller’s claim for unpaid salary was well-founded and ordered Creative Developers Ltd to pay £2,442.52 in unpaid gross salary.
The tribunal also found that Mr Fuller’s claim for unpaid notice pay was well-founded and ordered the respondent to pay £1,596.26 in gross notice pay. The judgment records a total award of £4,038.78.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records the claim as unpaid salary and holds it well-founded, ordering £2,442.52 gross. The specific statutory label is not stated in the reasons; this classification is inferred from the tribunal listing categories. | Upheld | — | £2,443 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records the claim as unpaid notice pay and holds it well-founded, ordering £1,596.26 gross. The specific statutory label is not stated in the reasons; this classification is inferred from the tribunal listing categories. | Upheld | — | £1,596 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,039
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.