Case 2414174/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs E Nicol v Connor Hadfield — 2023

Case reference: 2414174/2021
Decision date: 3 January 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ainscough Date

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs E Nicol

Respondent

Connor Hadfield

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent did not present a response. On the information before the Employment Judge, Mrs E Nicol worked as a delivery driver for Connor Hadfield's sandwich shop from 8 July 2021 to 12 July 2021, and her gross pay was £50 per day.

The tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay five days' wages. It held that there had been an unlawful deduction from wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and ordered payment of the gross sum of £250.

The tribunal also found that the respondent failed to provide a statement of employment particulars. Because the unlawful deduction claim succeeded, section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 required the tribunal to make the minimum award of compensation, assessed at two weeks' gross pay, which was £500. The judgment records total gross awards of £750, and also includes the standard tribunal notice on interest with a relevant decision day of 3 January 2023 and a stipulated rate of 8% per annum.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The respondent did not present a response. The claimant worked as a delivery driver from 8 July 2021 to 12 July 2021 and was entitled to gross pay of £50 per day.	Upheld	—	£250
Other	The tribunal found that the respondent failed to provide a statement of employment particulars. The award of £500 was made under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 as the minimum amount equal to two weeks' gross pay, following the upheld unlawful deduction claim.	Upheld	—	£500

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £750; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.