Case 3305492/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr Jody Kennedy T/a Construction Safety UK Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 3305492/2018
- Decision date
- 13 July 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response in defence to the claims. Employment Judge Bedeau entered judgment for Mr Wayne Lawton in respect of his unauthorised deduction from wages claim and his claim that the respondent failed to provide initial employment particulars.
The claim form had referred to unauthorised deductions from wages, outstanding expenses, unspecified costs and charges, compensation for inconvenience and pressure, and failure to provide initial employment particulars. At the hearing, the claimant attended without documents supporting the sums claimed. The judge noted an example of £350 expenses said to have been incurred, but was not satisfied with the state of the evidence on remedy.
The tribunal therefore entered judgment in default of a response but did not assess compensation at that hearing. The case was listed for a remedy hearing on 7 March 2019, and the claimant was directed to produce documentary evidence supporting the sums claimed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment was entered in default of a response for the unauthorised deduction from wages claim; remedy was reserved to a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Judgment was entered for the claim that the respondent failed to provide initial written employment particulars; no more specific enum category is available. | Upheld | — | — |
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.