Case 3201693/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Shiv McKeval v Glyn Hopkin Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3201693/2020
- Decision date
- 6 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Peter Wilkinson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Shiv McKeval
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing at East London Hearing Centre by Cloud Video Platform on 6 April 2021, before Employment Judge Peter Wilkinson, the claimant, Mr Shiv McKeval, appeared in person and the respondent, Glyn Hopkin Limited, was represented by Mr Alfred Weiss of Gunner Cooke LLP. The tribunal dealt only with the claimant's claims for unlawful deduction of wages and statutory holiday pay.
The tribunal allowed both claims. It found that the respondent should pay the claimant for 21 weeks of wages at £348.80 per week, totalling £7,324.80, and also holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations 1998 for 9 days at £69.76 per day, totalling £627.84.
The judgment states that the respondent must pay £7,952.64 in total. No separate award for interest, injury to feelings, or any other remedy is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim allowed; tribunal awarded £7,324.80 for wages, calculated as 21 weeks at £348.80. | Upheld | — | £7,325 |
| Holiday pay | Claim allowed under the Working Time Regulations 1998; tribunal awarded £627.84 for 9 days at £69.76. | Upheld | — | £628 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,953
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.