Case 2503671/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D McDonald 1st v Structural Timber Systems Ltd 2nd Respondent: NE Foundry Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2503671/2019
- Decision date
- 12 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Appearances
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D McDonald 1st
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was heard on 11 March 2020 before Employment Judge Sweeney in the absence of both respondents, after the tribunal decided it was in the interests of justice to proceed. The proceedings had begun against Structural Timber Systems Ltd, but during case management and at the hearing the claimant accepted that NE Foundry Ltd was his employer, and the tribunal added NE Foundry Ltd as the Second Respondent. The Second Respondent later accepted that the claimant was owed some money, but did not attend the final hearing.
On the wages issue, the tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence, with reference to the Second Respondent's own time-sheet summary and payslips, that extra overtime had not been paid on 31 May 2019 and that 10 hours had been omitted from the 30 June 2019 payment. Applying section 13 ERA 1996, the tribunal found a series of unlawful deductions totalling £103.94 and held that there was no contractual or written authority for the shortfalls.
On holiday pay, the tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to 3.5 days accrued but untaken holiday valued at £229.88, and also to £65.68 for Good Friday, which had been taken but not paid. The tribunal therefore upheld the holiday pay claim in the total sum of £295.56, referring to regulation 14(3) and regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998.
The tribunal also made an award under section 38 Employment Act 2002 because the Second Respondent had not provided written particulars of employment. It found that the claims fell within schedule 5 of the Act and that it would not be unjust or inequitable to make an award. The tribunal made the higher award of 4 weeks' gross pay at £328.40 per week, producing £1,313.60. The total amount ordered to be paid was £1,713.10.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Against the Second Respondent. The tribunal found a series of unlawful deductions in respect of pay date 31 May 2019 and 30 June 2019, totalling £103.94, with no contractual or written authorisation. | Upheld | — | £104 |
| Holiday pay | Against the Second Respondent. The tribunal found 3.5 days accrued but untaken holiday plus one day, Good Friday, taken but unpaid, totalling £295.56 under the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Upheld | — | £296 |
| Other | Section 38 Employment Act 2002 award for failure to provide written particulars. The tribunal made the higher award of 4 weeks' gross pay at £328.40 per week. | Upheld | — | £1,314 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,713
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
7 references- rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 47 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 13 ERA 1996
- regulation 14(3) Working Time Regulations 1998
- regulation 30(1)(b) Working Time Regulations 1998
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- section 4 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.