Case 2415405/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Mainwaring v All Saints Construction (in compulsory liquidation) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2415405/2021
- Decision date
- 15 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Howard Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Mainwaring
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Howard Date determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment was sent to the parties on 15 July 2022 and ordered the respondent to pay £2,977.20 in total.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the gross sum of £827.00 for November 2021. It also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £827.00 in damages for that claim.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,323.20, stated in the judgment as 8 x £165.40 per day.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages for November 2021; gross sum of £827.00 awarded. | Upheld | — | £827 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £827.00 awarded. | Upheld | — | £827 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay holiday entitlement; £1,323.20 awarded, calculated as 8 x £165.40 per day. | Upheld | — | £1,323 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,977
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.