Case 3201125/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Howlett v Unicus Agency Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3201125/2019
- Decision date
- 30 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mclaren Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Howlett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss J Howlett worked for Unicus Agency Limited from 11 March 2019 to 2 April 2019 as a digital marketing manager. The tribunal accepted that her annual salary had been agreed at £38,000 and that she was due payment on 29 March 2019, but that her wages remained unpaid when she left employment. It also accepted that the respondent ended her employment after losing a significant client, and that one week’s notice was due during the probationary period.
The tribunal found the complaint under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 well-founded. It accepted that the respondent did not dispute owing the unpaid wages, which totalled £1,595.76. The tribunal also accepted that the claimant had suffered financial loss caused by the late payment, including mortgage charges and council tax penalties, supported by documents and by the respondent’s emails referring to cash flow difficulties, a payroll mix-up, and contract-date issues.
The breach of contract claim was dismissed because the loss of pay for the notice period was included within the unpaid wage claim, so there was no separate contractual loss to award. The tribunal therefore made a declaration under section 23 of the 1996 Act, ordered payment of the unpaid wages, and awarded a further £405 for financial loss, making a total order of £2,000.76.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal declared the s.13 ERA 1996 complaint well-founded and ordered payment of £1,595.76 unpaid wages plus £405 compensation for financial loss attributable to the late/non-payment. | Upheld | — | £2,001 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed because the notice-period pay fell within the sum claimed for deduction from wages, so there was no separate contractual loss to award. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,001
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,596
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £405
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA 1996
- s.24 ERA 1996
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.