Case 3303841/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Ampah v Green’s Bracknell Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3303841/2020
- Decision date
- 14 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Ampah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Ampah brought a claim for unpaid wages arising from two weeks' employment with Green's Bracknell Limited. The respondent accepted that he had worked for two weeks but said he was not entitled to any pay because he had left in breach of contract. The tribunal noted that the respondent also tried to advance a breach of contract point, but rejected that because the claimant was not bringing a breach of contract claim.
The claimant attended by CVP and the respondent did not attend. The tribunal had only the claimant's evidence on the disputed hours of work. It accepted his evidence that he had agreed to work 40 hours a week, that he worked 39 hours in the first week and over 40 hours in the second week, and that he was claiming for 80 hours worked. The contract extract before the tribunal showed an annual salary of £33,000, but did not show the hours or days of work that had been agreed.
On the figures, the tribunal accepted the claimant's calculation that gross pay due was £1,269.23. It also accepted that the respondent had made a payment of £549.90 on 11 February 2022, which the claimant credited against the sum due. The balance outstanding was therefore £719.33 gross.
The judgment records that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from wages and orders it to pay £719.33 gross to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unpaid wages in respect of two weeks' employment was upheld. The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that he agreed to work 40 hours a week and worked 39 hours in the first week and over 40 hours in the second week. It rejected the respondent's case that no further pay was due and noted that the respondent's attempted breach of contract point was not a claim before the tribunal. | Upheld | — | £719 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £719
- 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.