Case 3200494/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Lee Steele v Rhinos Plant Hire — 2023
- Case reference
- 3200494/2023
- Decision date
- 23 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Representation Claimant
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Lee Steele
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response within the permitted time and did not attend the hearing. The tribunal therefore entered judgment for the claimant under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The only substantive claim addressed in the judgment was the claimant's claim for notice pay. The tribunal found that claim well-founded and said it succeeded.
The claimant was awarded £2,945 net, calculated as four weeks' notice pay based on 47.5 hours per week at £15.50 an hour. The judgment states that any liability to income tax or employee's national insurance contributions on that amount was the claimant's alone.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal entered judgment under rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a response or attend. The claim for notice pay was found well-founded and succeeded. The award was £2,945 net, described as four weeks' notice pay at £15.50 an hour for 47.5 hours per week. | Upheld | — | £2,945 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,945
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.