Case 3303900/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Lingyte v Aperta Bars Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3303900/2019
- Decision date
- 7 January 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Representation
- Venue
- Cambridge Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R Lingyte
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs R Lingyte was employed by Aperta Bars Limited as General Manager of the Old House Pub & Kitchen in Northampton for 12 days in January 2019, ending on 25 January 2019 when she resigned without notice. After early conciliation, she presented a claim for 12 days' unpaid pay. She also advanced an unfair dismissal complaint, which the tribunal rejected because she did not have sufficient continuous service.
On the wage claim, the tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that she had worked the 12 days and that the gross pay due for that period was £1,230. The claimant had said the unpaid amount was £1,052 net, but the tribunal found the gross sum due to be £1,230.
The respondent's written position changed from a denial that the claimant had worked for the company to an acceptance that she had been employed, together with assertions that she was unreliable and had resigned in breach of contract. Mr Kooner also sought to recover alleged replacement costs of £2,040, stock losses of £325.43 and a cash shortage of £95.77. The tribunal rejected that counterclaim for lack of jurisdiction, noting that the claim before it was not a breach of contract complaint and, in any event, the counterclaim had not been brought within the time limit under the Employment Tribunals (Extension of Jurisdiction) Order 1994. The tribunal therefore upheld the unauthorised deduction claim and ordered payment of £1,230 gross.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal accepted that the claimant worked 12 days and was owed gross pay of £1,230; it ordered the respondent to pay that sum. | Upheld | — | £1,230 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal rejected this complaint because the claimant had insufficient continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,230
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- Employment Tribunals (Extension of Jurisdiction) Order 1994
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.