Case 2409660/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Xavier Barber v The Arches Garage Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2409660/2023
- Decision date
- 22 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspinall Representation
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Xavier Barber
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Xavier Barber brought a claim said to concern 10 days' unpaid wages after a trial period as a mechanic with The Arches Garage Limited. He did not attend the hearing. The tribunal considered postponement under rule 30A and dismissal under rule 47, but after making enquiries through the clerk and receiving no information from the claimant, it proceeded with the hearing.
Mr and Mrs Thorne, for the respondent, accepted that Mr Barber had worked on 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 August 2023 and had not been paid for those days. They accepted that £347.33 was owed, calculated at £69.46 gross per day. The tribunal also recorded that the respondent could not offset the alleged cost of damage to a customer's vehicle against wages because there was no signed contract allowing deductions.
The tribunal construed the claim as a complaint under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for unauthorised deduction from wages. On that basis, it upheld the unpaid wages claim and ordered the respondent to pay £347.33. It then dismissed the claimant's requested consequential loss because he was absent and had not proved it, and dismissed the injury-to-feelings request because that was not a valid award for an unpaid wages claim.
The written judgment included the standard interest notice, stating that the relevant decision day was 22 April 2024 and the calculation day was 23 April 2024, with interest at 8% per annum if the award remained unpaid after 14 days. No separate interest sum was awarded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal treated the claim form as a s.13 ERA 1996 complaint for unpaid wages. The respondent accepted that five days' wages were owed for 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 August 2023 at £69.46 gross per day, and the tribunal ordered payment of £347.33 by consent. | Upheld | — | £347 |
| Other | The claimant also sought compensation for consequential loss said to flow from non-payment of wages. The tribunal dismissed that element under rule 47 because the claimant did not attend and had provided no information or evidence to prove the loss. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claimant also asked for an award for injury to feelings. The tribunal held that injury to feelings is not a valid award in an unpaid wages claim and dismissed that request. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £347
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- rule 30A
- rule 47
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990
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.