Case 3205972/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Florence Burchill v Delroy Philogene — 2022
- Case reference
- 3205972/2021
- Decision date
- 11 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Housego Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Florence Burchill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an appearance-not-entered case, although Mr Philogene dialled in and said he had filed a response online. Tribunal staff found no response on file. The judge heard oral evidence from Ms Burchill and reviewed screenshots of messages exchanged between the parties. Those messages showed work at 10 hours per week at £10.25 an hour and repeated references to wages. The tribunal found that Ms Burchill was not a self-employed contractor and that the relationship was intended to be one of employment.
The tribunal found that Ms Burchill worked for Mr Philogene from 4 March 2020 to 19 March 2021 as a producer/station manager at Shoreditch Radio, that she was paid weekly, and that she was not given a written contract of employment or a statutory statement of principal terms and conditions. It held that she was entitled to one week’s notice because she was paid weekly, and that ending the employment on 19 March 2021 without notice meant she was owed £102.50 in lieu of notice.
On wages, the tribunal accepted that between 1 February 2021 and 29 March 2021 Ms Burchill worked 70 hours at £10.25 an hour, amounting to £717.50, and that she was also owed £19.96 for an Adobe subscription used for video editing. It found that five payments of £50 had been made when she asked for wages, totalling £250, which reduced the amount due for this head to £487.46. The tribunal also accepted that holiday had accrued but not been taken, and that £269.16 was due for holiday pay.
The tribunal ordered payment of £205 under s.38 of the Employment Act 2002 for the failure to provide the statutory statement, £487.46 for unlawful deductions from wages, £102.50 for notice pay, and £269.16 for holiday pay, making a total award of £1,064.12.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Failure to provide a statutory statement of principal terms and conditions, contrary to s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996; the tribunal ordered two weeks' pay under s.38 Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £205 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid wages were found to have been unlawfully deducted; the tribunal accepted 70 hours at £10.25 per hour plus £19.96 for an Adobe subscription, less £250 already paid. | Upheld | — | £487 |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay for one week's pay in lieu of notice. | Upheld | — | £103 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued but untaken holiday pay at the end of employment. | Upheld | — | £269 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,064
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.38 Employment Act 2002
- s.13 Employment Rights Act 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.