Case 2411693/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Peet-Harrison v 64 Energy Limited (in Voluntary Members Liquidation) — 2019
- Case reference
- 2411693/2018
- Decision date
- 12 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Feeney REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Peet-Harrison
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld Mr A Peet-Harrison's claim for unlawful deduction of wages under Part 2 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 in respect of unpaid wages, commission and holiday pay. It awarded £5,523 for seven months' commission, £6,117 for three months' wages including commission, and £1,599 for 17 days' holiday pay, making a total of £13,239.
Separately, the tribunal granted the claimant a preparation time order and awarded £3,900, calculated as 100 hours at £39 per hour. The written record also included the standard interest notice, stating that unpaid sums would carry interest if not paid within 14 days of the relevant decision day, but no separate quantified interest award was made in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The award was broken down as £5,523 for seven months' commission, £6,117 for three months' wages plus commission, and £1,599 for 17 days' holiday pay. The tribunal also made a separate preparation time order of £3,900. | Upheld | — | £13,239 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,239
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.