Case 2409144/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Shaw v NP Integrated Technology Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2409144/2020
- Decision date
- 3 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Shaw
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Manchester by CVP on 2 September 2021 before Employment Judge Phil Allen sitting alone. The claimant, Mr C Shaw, appeared in person. The respondent did not attend and was not represented. The judgment records three monetary findings in the claimant's favour: an unauthorised deduction from wages, dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, and unpaid holiday entitlement.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £2,962.74 gross for the unauthorised deduction from wages, £1,109.90 for breach of contract in respect of notice pay, and £1,109.93 gross for failure to pay holiday entitlement. The total award therefore came to £5,182.57. The judgment also required payment within 14 days of the date the decision was sent to the parties.
No written reasons were provided in the judgment record unless requested within 14 days, so the document does not explain the factual or legal analysis beyond the operative decision. The accompanying interest notice recorded the relevant decision day as 3 September 2021, the calculation day as 4 September 2021, and the stipulated rate of interest as 8%, but no separate interest sum was awarded in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages; gross sum awarded. | Upheld | — | £2,963 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice pay. | Upheld | — | £1,110 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday entitlement; gross sum awarded. | Upheld | — | £1,110 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,183
- 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.