Case 2402623/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Liam Edwards v ABC Engineering Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2402623/2022
- Decision date
- 10 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anderson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Liam Edwards
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Anderson, sitting alone at Liverpool by CVP, entered a Rule 21 judgment because the Respondent did not attend. The Claimant, Mr Liam Edwards, succeeded on both of his claims for unlawful deduction from wages. The tribunal found that the holiday pay element of the claim was well-founded and ordered ABC Engineering Limited to pay £832.50 gross.
The tribunal also found the Claimant's separate unlawful deduction from wages claim was well-founded and ordered payment of £1,017.50 gross. The total award was £1,850. The judgment was given orally at the hearing, and the written record notes that reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
A separate notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 records that, if the award is not paid within 14 days of the relevant decision day, interest may accrue at the stipulated rate of 8% from 11 August 2022. The judgment itself does not quantify any interest sum.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The judgment describes this as the Claimant's unlawful deduction from wages claim (holiday pay). | Upheld | — | £833 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,018 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,850
- 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.