Case 2500509/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Stuart Williams v PW Pub Co Ltd — 2020

Case reference: 2500509/2020
Decision date: 5 May 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Arullendran Date

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Stuart Williams

Respondent

PW Pub Co Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a Rule 21 liability judgment in which Employment Judge Arullendran Date found that Mr Stuart Williams's claim under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for unauthorised deduction of wages was well founded against PW Pub Co Ltd.

The tribunal also found Mr Williams's holiday pay claim under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 to be well founded, and his claim for breach of contract/notice pay to be well founded. The extracted judgment records liability only and does not set out any monetary award or remedy calculation.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal found the section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996 claim for unauthorised deduction of wages to be well founded in a Rule 21 liability judgment.	Upheld	—	—
Working time regulations	The tribunal found the holiday pay claim under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 to be well founded in a Rule 21 liability judgment.	Upheld	—	—
Breach of contract	The tribunal found the breach of contract claim for notice pay to be well founded in a Rule 21 liability judgment.	Upheld	—	—

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.

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.