Case 3307235/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Samuel Mason v AV Studios plc and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 3307235/2018
- Decision date
- 30 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Byrne Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Samuel Mason
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe second respondent had been served by letter dated 5 April 2019 but did not present a response by 3 May 2019. The Tribunal therefore treated the claims as not defended and entered judgment for the claimant under Rule 21 against the second respondent.
The Tribunal ordered payment of £204.00 for an outstanding bonus payment, described as damages for breach of contract. It also ordered £2,286.25 for outstanding wages. That sum was broken down as £248.00 for five days of statutory sick pay for 8 May 2018 to 14 May 2018, £397.00 for eight days worked in May 2018 net after tax and national insurance, £1,441.25 for unpaid national insurance contributions to HMRC during the claimant's employment, and £200.00 for outstanding employee contributions due to the student loans company.
The judgment does not record any separate award against the first respondent. On the figures ordered, the combined monetary total was £2,490.25.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Outstanding bonus payment awarded as damages for breach of contract against the second respondent under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | £204 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Award described as outstanding wages; the judgment itemises statutory sick pay, wages for days worked in May 2018, unpaid national insurance contributions, and student loan contributions. | Upheld | — | £2,286 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,490
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21
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.