Case 3302670/2023 · Employment Tribunal
self-representing For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 3302670/2023
- Decision date
- 27 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
self-representing For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge George heard the case at Reading by video on 27 September 2024. The claimant represented himself; the respondent did not attend, having been given notice of the hearing. The tribunal determined two complaints on the available material.
The complaint of unpaid holiday pay succeeded. The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant in respect of 13.33 days' holiday that had not been taken on termination of employment, and ordered payment of £1,238.22 net (13.33 x £92.89 per day).
The complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages also succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £521.50, comprising £223.50 in employer pension contributions not remitted to NEST and £298.00 in employee pension contributions deducted from the claimant's wages but not remitted to NEST, both for the period 1 September 2022 to 12 November 2022.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Tribunal found 13.33 days' accrued holiday unpaid on termination; awarded 13.33 x £92.89 net per day = £1,238.22. | Upheld | — | £1,238 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Award of £521.50 comprising £223.50 employer pension contributions not remitted to NEST (10 weeks @ £22.35) and £298.00 employee pension contributions deducted but not remitted (10 weeks @ £29.80), covering 1 September 2022 to 12 November 2022. | Upheld | — | £522 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,760
- 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.