Case 2500927/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr B Elsworthy v Deli Number 4 Hexham Limited — 2023

Case reference: 2500927/2023
Decision date: 18 September 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Arullendran Case

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr B Elsworthy

Respondent

Deli Number 4 Hexham Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mr B Elsworthy presented a claim on 17 May 2023 for unpaid wages for 28 February to 5 March 2023, notice pay for 6 March to 13 March 2023, and holiday pay. After re-service at the respondent's correct address, the respondent was required to file a response by 23 August 2023 but did not do so. The judgment was therefore entered on the basis of the information provided by the claimant on the ET1 form under Rule 21.

The tribunal found the claim for unauthorised deduction of wages under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 well-founded and ordered payment of £480.77 gross, subject to statutory deductions. It also found the notice pay claim well-founded and ordered £480.77 gross, subject to statutory deductions. The claim for accrued and outstanding holiday pay under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 was also well-founded, with an award of £279.32 gross, subject to statutory deductions.

The total award was £1,240.86.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	Expressly found well-founded under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.	Upheld	—	£481
Breach of contract	The judgment refers to this only as a claim for notice pay and does not cite a separate statutory provision; classified here as breach of contract.	Upheld	—	£481
Working time regulations	Expressly found well-founded for accrued and outstanding holiday pay under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998.	Upheld	—	£279

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £1,241; 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.