Case 2602839/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Isaac Carter v Twenty Four Seven Recruitment Limited Heard: Cloud Video Platform Regi — 2024
- Case reference
- 2602839/2022
- Decision date
- 6 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Broughton Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Isaac Carter
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Isaac Carter did not attend the final hearing on 20 May 2024. The tribunal recorded that practicable enquiries were made about his absence and decided to proceed in his absence under Rule 47. The respondent was represented by a solicitor.
The tribunal dismissed the claim of unlawful deductions from wages brought under section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996. It also dismissed the claim for holiday pay brought pursuant to the Working Time Regulations 1998. The judgment states that both claims were not well founded and were dismissed in their entirety.
The written record notes that reasons for the judgment had been given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that claims of unlawful deductions from wages under section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996 were not well founded and were dismissed in their entirety. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the claim for holiday pay pursuant to the Working Time Regulations 1998 was not well founded and was dismissed in its entirety. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.