Case 2600337/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Peter Wilson v Isys Care Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2600337/2024
- Decision date
- 19 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Peter Wilson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Ahmed, sitting alone at Nottingham on 18 July 2024, heard the claims of Mr Peter Wilson against Isys Care Ltd. The Respondent did not appear and was not represented. The Claimant was represented by Mr Graham Hales as a lay representative.
The Tribunal found all three complaints well-founded. The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages succeeded, with the Respondent ordered to pay £1,891.20 gross. The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay succeeded, with damages of £573.86 gross awarded. The complaint of unpaid holiday pay also succeeded, the Tribunal treating the failure to pay for holidays accrued but not taken on termination as an unauthorised deduction from wages, with £264.00 gross awarded.
All sums were awarded gross, with the Claimant responsible for any tax and National Insurance. Reasons were given orally at the hearing and written reasons will not be provided unless requested within the prescribed period.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded; gross sum awarded, with tax/NI to be accounted for by the Claimant. | Upheld | — | £1,891 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract in relation to notice pay; damages awarded gross, with tax/NI to be accounted for by the Claimant. | Upheld | — | £574 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday pay for holidays accrued but not taken on the date employment ended; treated by the tribunal as an unauthorised deduction from wages. Awarded gross. | Upheld | — | £264 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,729
- 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.