Case 3201604/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Peter Gates v Ace Protection Services Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3201604/2020
- Decision date
- 19 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barrett Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Peter Gates
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mr Peter Gates accepted Ace Protection Services Limited's written offer of employment dated 8 January 2020 and that his employment began on 13 January 2020 as a Trainee Close Protection Driver. It accepted that the contract provided for basic pay of £42 per hour for 48 hours per week, with standby arrangements at £15 per hour, and that no work was provided and no wages were paid during the period up to 16 June 2020.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It calculated the unpaid wages at £2,016 per week for 22 weeks, giving a gross award of £44,352. The judgment records that tax and employee national insurance contributions may be deducted before payment.
The claimant's holiday pay claim was dismissed. The tribunal found that his employment had not ended, so the regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998 entitlement to payment in lieu of accrued but untaken leave had not arisen. It also held that it had no jurisdiction to hear a breach of contract claim for unpaid holiday pay while the employment continued.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the claimant was entitled under the contract to £42 per hour for 48 hours per week, that his employment began on 13 January 2020, and that he was not paid for the period to 16 June 2020. It calculated the unauthorised deductions at 22 weeks multiplied by £2,016 per week, totalling £44,352 gross, and noted that tax and employee national insurance could be deducted before payment. | Upheld | — | £44,352 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal held that the claimant's employment was continuing, so the regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998 entitlement to payment in lieu of accrued but untaken leave had not arisen. It also said it had no jurisdiction to hear a breach of contract claim for unpaid holiday pay because the employment had not terminated. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £44,352
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA 1996
- reg. 14 WTR 1998
- article 3 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1994
- Rule 47
- Roberts v Skelmersdale College [2004] IRLR 69
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.