Case 3301403/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Jones v SHR Contracts Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3301403/2021
- Decision date
- 20 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Cowen REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Jones
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr K Jones, brought a single claim for unlawful deduction from wages arising from unpaid wages for the final two weeks of work and 2.5 days of accrued holiday pay. The respondent said he was a self-employed subcontractor and not a worker, so no entitlement under the Employment Rights Act 1996 arose.
The tribunal found that there was a verbal agreement for the claimant to work for the respondent, that he undertook the work personally, and that there was insufficient evidence of any agreed right of substitution. It found that the claimant was directed as to what work to do, where and when to do it, and that he was not free to work for other clients while engaged by the respondent. Applying the approach in Uber and s.230(3)(b) ERA 1996, the tribunal held that he was a worker and that the respondent was not his client or customer.
On remedy, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had not been paid for his final two weeks of work. Using the agreed daily rate of £180, it found an unlawful deduction of £1,800. It also found that he had accrued 2.5 days of annual leave by the end of the engagement, that this had not been taken, and that holiday pay was due under s.27(1)(a) ERA 1996 and regulation 16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The holiday pay was assessed at £450, producing a gross award of £2,250.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant was a worker under s.230(3)(b) ERA 1996. It held that unpaid wages for the final two weeks of work totalled £1,800 and that 2.5 days of accrued but untaken holiday pay totalled £450. The tribunal did not split the award between those two components and ordered payment of the gross sum of £2,250. | Upheld | — | £2,250 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,250
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
5 references- s.230(3)(b) ERA 1996
- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.27(1)(a) ERA 1996
- Regulation 16 WTR 1998
- Uber BV and others v Aslam and others [2021] UKSC 5
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.