Case 2501723/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Ballance v Tyler, Robson & Don Buildings Services Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2501723/2020
- Decision date
- 28 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Ballance
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £255.56. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £4,520.79.
The tribunal further held that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,390. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,127.84. The listed hearing on 17 November 2020 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £255.56. | Upheld | — | £256 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £4,520.79. | Upheld | — | £4,521 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,390. | Upheld | — | £5,390 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,127.84. | Upheld | — | £1,128 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,294
- across all upheld claims
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.