Case 3305253/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Jonathan Bright v Ridgewall Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3305253/2021
- Decision date
- 9 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Jonathan Bright
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response having been filed on behalf of Ridgewall Ltd, Employment Judge Laidler entered judgment for the claimant in sums due under three heads. The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages for November 2020 (£469.84), December 2020 (£616.67), January 2021 (£616.67) and February 2021 (£154.17), totalling £1,857.35.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the contractual on-call allowance of £2,250 per annum, referred to in clause 17 of the claimant's contract of employment, throughout the claimant's employment, and ordered payment of £2,343.75. It further found that the claimant was dismissed without one month's contractual notice and ordered £3,088.33. The total amount payable was £7,289.43.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment entered for the claimant for unauthorised deductions from wages covering November 2020 to February 2021. | Upheld | — | £1,857 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the contractual on-call allowance in clause 17 of the employment contract. | Upheld | — | £2,344 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal ordered payment in respect of dismissal without one month's contractual notice. | Upheld | — | £3,088 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,289
- 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.