Case 3200720/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms P Tyrannes v Sabio Recruitment Ltd (Company No 14556744) — 2024
- Case reference
- 3200720/2024
- Decision date
- 8 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Allen KC
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedMs P Tyrannes
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge W A Allen KC at the East London Hearing Centre on 8 July 2024 heard the claim of Ms P Tyrannes against Sabio Recruitment Ltd. The respondent did not attend and had not responded to the claim, despite having received notification. The Tribunal had a bundle prepared by the claimant and her oral evidence.
The Tribunal found that despite a contract purporting to be zero hours, the claimant in fact worked a standard 37-hour week at Teledyne and was contractually entitled to weekly pay at £10.42 per hour. Her resignation on 16 February 2024 followed the respondent's prior breach in failing to pay her for the weeks commencing 5 and 12 February. The judge held the assertions made by the respondent's director (that she could face thousands in penalties for resigning, that she had to work six months for full holiday entitlement, and that hers was a fixed-term contract) were wrong.
The Tribunal awarded £771.08 for unpaid wages (two weeks at 37 hours), £145.88 for unpaid double-time overtime on Sunday 11 February, and £718.98 for unpaid accrued holiday pay. The respondent was ordered to pay £1,635.94 gross in total.
Claims and outcomes
3 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £771 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £146 |
| Holiday pay | Upheld | — | £719 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,636
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.