Case 2407880/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Nolan v UEBC Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2407880/2023
- Decision date
- 29 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Nolan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment by Employment Judge Phil Allen. The tribunal found that UEBC Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr P Nolan's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £2,083.33. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, awarding damages of £480.76.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £769.20. The judgment itself does not set out any contested factual dispute or additional reasoning beyond those findings and awards.
The separate notice to the judgment records that interest may become payable if the sums are not paid within 14 days after the relevant decision day. It states that the relevant decision day was 29 December 2023, the calculation day was 30 December 2023, and the stipulated interest rate was 8% per annum.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment orders payment of the gross sum of £2,083.33 for an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £2,083 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £480.76. | Upheld | — | £481 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £769.20. | Upheld | — | £769 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,333
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, Rule 21
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.