Case 2500325/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Worley v 808 Records Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2500325/2020
- Decision date
- 24 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Worley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a complaint under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, saying he had not been paid for work done for the respondent and that the amount owing was £357.12. The tribunal recorded that the respondent’s name was amended to 808 Records Ltd after the claimant confirmed that he had been employed by that company.
The respondent did not present a response within the time limit in rule 16(1) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The facts set out in the claim form were confirmed in correspondence and at a case management hearing, and liability for the amount claimed was not contested. The tribunal therefore determined the claim and remedy on the available material without a hearing and entered judgment under rule 21(2).
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £357 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £357
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- rule 16(1) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 21(2) Employment Tribunal 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.