Case 3303407/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Fountain v Event Evolution Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3303407/2020
- Decision date
- 19 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Fountain
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response, and the tribunal proceeded under Rule 21. On the papers, Employment Judge R Lewis found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages, had failed to pay holiday entitlement, and had dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice.
The tribunal awarded £1,800.00 for the wages deduction, £187.50 for unpaid holiday entitlement, and £375.00 for breach of contract notice pay. The judgment records that these sums total £2,362.50.
No discrimination, unfair dismissal, or whistleblowing findings are recorded in the judgment text provided. The decision is a default judgment based on the respondent's failure to respond, with the awards confined to the specific monetary sums set out in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,800.00. | Upheld | — | £1,800 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £187.50. | Upheld | — | £188 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £375.00. | Upheld | — | £375 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,363
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21
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.