Case 3305169/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Dough&Co Huntingdon Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305169/2022
- Decision date
- 17 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place at Cambridge on 17 October 2023 before Employment Judge Tynan. The Respondent, Dough&Co Huntingdon Limited (in voluntary liquidation), did not attend and was not represented; the Claimant appeared in person with an interpreter. The judgment records three successful money claims arising from the employment relationship.
First, the Tribunal found that the Respondent breached the Claimant’s contract by not paying commission as agreed. It awarded the Claimant £3,000 gross by way of damages for breach of contract. Second, it found that the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £830.98 gross in respect of accrued but untaken holiday.
Third, the Tribunal declared well-founded the Claimant’s complaint that the Respondent made unauthorised deductions from his wages and ordered payment of £421.98. The total sum awarded to the Claimant was £4,252.96 gross.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal found the Respondent breached the Claimant’s contract by not paying commission as agreed and awarded gross damages of £3,000. | Upheld | — | £3,000 |
| Holiday pay | The Tribunal found the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered £830.98 gross for accrued but untaken holiday. | Upheld | — | £831 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal declared the Claimant’s complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded and ordered £421.98. | Upheld | — | £422 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,253
- 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.