Case 3305301/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Goddard v Business Growth Experts Ltd t/a Mobile Genius (in voluntary Liquidation) — 2022
- Case reference
- 3305301/2022
- Decision date
- 22 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Goddard
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Watford Employment Tribunals on 22 July 2022. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge therefore entered judgment under rule 21. The tribunal dealt with the claim on the papers and made findings on the basis of the unopposed claim form and the material before it.
The tribunal declared that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay £407.69 gross in respect of 4 days unpaid wages from February 2022. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £2,548.07.
The tribunal stated that it had no jurisdiction to award compensation for tax and national insurance deducted from wages and not paid to HMRC. The total monetary award on the judgment as entered was £2,955.76.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal made a rule 21 judgment and declared that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages, awarding the claimant the gross sum of £407.69 for 4 days unpaid wages from February 2022. | Upheld | — | £408 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £2,548.07. | Upheld | — | £2,548 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,956
- 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.