Case 3303938/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Eric Whitaker v Jason Richard Pittiglio — 2026
- Case reference
- 3303938/2024
- Decision date
- 29 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardner Appearances
Parties
3 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningUnder Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 the hearing proceeded in the absence of the respondents. The Employment Judge accepted the claimant's oral evidence on oath that he had been employed as an apprentice carpenter and joiner from 31 July 2023 to 12 March 2024 on the basis of an oral contract of employment, applying the definition of an employee under s.230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the test in Ready Mixed Concrete (SE) Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance.
The Tribunal found that the respondents had failed to pay the claimant for the days and hours he worked at national minimum wage. The total sum due was calculated at £6,025.76 less £900 already paid, leaving an unlawful deduction of £5,125.76 gross. Because it was not entirely clear whether the contractual relationship was with Mr Pittiglio personally or with JP Carpentry & Joinery Ltd (in liquidation), both respondents were held jointly and severally liable.
The Employment Judge declined to make any orders under s.38 Employment Act 2002 or s.12 Employment Rights Act 1996 because those matters were not pleaded in the ET1.
Claims and outcomes
1 claim adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £5,126 |
Legal tests applied
5 referencesRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,126
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.