Case 2601556/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v James Marshall (T/a Myford Stuff) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2601556/2021
- Decision date
- 30 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fredericks Appearances
- Venue
- Lincoln Magistrates Court
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Lincoln Magistrates Court on 14 March 2022, Employment Judge Fredericks found that Mrs W Szczepanik had suffered an unlawful deduction from wages in March 2021 and ordered James Marshall (t/a Myford Stuff) to pay £122.08. The tribunal also found that the claimant had not committed a repudiatory breach of contract permitting summary dismissal, and awarded one week’s pay in lieu of notice of £122.08.
The tribunal further found that accrued but outstanding holiday pay remained unpaid, awarding £95.92. It also found that no particulars of employment had been provided during the employment and, under section 38 Employment Act 2002, made an award of four weeks’ pay of £488.32. The total award was £828.40.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unlawful deduction from wages during March 2021; the tribunal ordered payment of £122.08. | Upheld | — | £122 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant had not committed a repudiatory breach of contract permitting summary dismissal and awarded one week’s pay in lieu of notice. | Upheld | — | £122 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued but outstanding holiday pay; the tribunal ordered payment of £95.92. | Upheld | — | £96 |
| Other | No particulars of employment were provided during the employment; the tribunal made an award of four weeks’ pay under section 38 Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £488 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £828
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- repudiatory breach of contract
- just and equitable
- s.38 Employment Act 2002
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.