Case 3200757/2020 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Ms S Day (2) Ms H Newman v Mr J Eade and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 3200757/2020
- Decision date
- 3 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
3 namedClaimant
(1) Ms S Day (2) Ms H Newman
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 3 September 2020 at East London Hearing Centre, Employment Judge Burgher dealt with the linked claims of Ms Day and Ms Newman. Mr Eade had sought a postponement on disability and autism grounds, but the hearing proceeded by video with reference to his written statement. The tribunal permitted his participation only to the extent allowed by rule 21, and the matter proceeded without oral attendance from the first respondent.
In Ms Day's case, the tribunal found that Auworld Ltd, not Mr Eade personally, was the employer. It relied on the written contract naming AU Productions, a trading name of Auworld Ltd, and on the fact that the company was properly registered at Companies House. Mr Eade was dismissed as a party to the proceedings, and the tribunal directed that Ms Day's ET1 be served on Auworld Ltd under rule 34. No final merits decision or award was made on Ms Day's unpaid salary and notice pay claim in this judgment.
In Ms Newman's case, the tribunal accepted that Auworld Ltd had failed to pay wages due for work on 22 and 29 February 2020, so the unpaid wages claim succeeded. It also found that Auworld Ltd had failed to provide a written statement of particulars, and made an award of four weeks' pay under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. The tribunal ordered Auworld Ltd to pay Ms Newman £300 in total, made up of £100 for unpaid wages and £200 under section 38.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that Auworld Ltd had failed to pay Ms Newman wages due for work on 22 and 29 February 2020. | Upheld | — | £100 |
| Other | The tribunal found that Auworld Ltd failed to provide Ms Newman with a statement of written particulars and awarded four weeks' pay under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £200 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £300
- 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.