Case 2407644/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Noble v Kennedy Pub Co Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2407644/2021
- Decision date
- 28 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ganner
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Noble
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone, held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered Kennedy Pub Co Limited to pay Mr B Noble the net sum of £821.10. The judgment records that Mr Noble worked variable hours and had average net earnings of £44.63 per week. The relevant furlough period was 5 November 2020 to 12 April 2021, being 23 weeks.
The tribunal calculated furlough pay on the basis of 80% of average wage at £35.70 per week. The reasons section then states that £35.70 multiplied by 23 weeks produces a total sum due of £821.60, but the operative part of the judgment orders payment of £821.10. No separate award of interest or other remedy is set out in the judgment itself, although the notice to the parties explains the general tribunal interest regime.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the net sum of £821.10. In the reasons section, the tribunal recorded average net earnings of £44.63 per week, a furlough period of 23 weeks from 5 November 2020 to 12 April 2021, and furlough pay at 80% of average wage of £35.70 per week. The same section states that £35.70 x 23 = £821.60, which does not match the operative award. | Upheld | — | £821 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £821
- 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.