Case 3310549/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Hodgson v Beauty Labs International Limited (in liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 3310549/2023
- Decision date
- 20 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchings
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Hodgson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a liability judgment of Employment Judge Tynan issued on 10 May 2023, the claimant's claims of holiday pay, unlawful deduction from wages, breach of contract (notice pay) and unfair dismissal succeeded against the respondent under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, the response having been struck out. The respondent is in voluntary liquidation but the remedy hearing proceeded.
At the remedy hearing on 25 June 2024, Employment Judge Hutchings (sitting alone) awarded holiday pay of £2,689.53 for 6.3 days at £426.91, made no award for unlawful deduction from wages as the claimant confirmed no wages were outstanding, and awarded notice pay of £25,000 (12 weeks at £2,134.55 net, capped at the statutory limit). For unfair dismissal, the Tribunal calculated a basic award of £6,852 (eight years' service at one-and-a-half weeks' pay subject to the £571 statutory maximum) and a compensatory award comprising immediate loss of £23,480.05 (11 weeks after deducting the notice pay period) plus pension loss of £27,600, with no future loss as the claimant had secured commensurate employment.
A 25% ACAS uplift was applied to the compensatory award and notice pay, the award was grossed up under Hardie Grant London Ltd v Aspden, and the resulting figure was then limited to the statutory cap of £93,878. With £500 added for loss of statutory protection, the total unfair dismissal award was £101,230. As the judgment was made in default under Rule 21, no deduction was made under s.122(2) for contributory conduct. The overall award was £128,919.53.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | 6.3 days outstanding at a daily rate of £426.91. | Upheld | — | £2,690 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Liability succeeded at the May 2023 default judgment, but the claimant confirmed no wages were outstanding at the remedy hearing, so no award was made. | Upheld | — | £0 |
| Breach of contract | 12 weeks' notice at £2,134.55 net per week = £25,614.60, limited to the statutory cap of £25,000. | Upheld | — | £25,000 |
| Unfair dismissal | Basic award £6,852 + compensatory award capped at the statutory limit of £93,878 + £500 for loss of statutory protection. Judgment in default under Rule 21; no s.122(2) contributory conduct deduction. | Upheld | — | £101,230 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £128,920
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £6,852
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £93,878
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 37 (Strike Out)
- s.122(2) ERA 1996
- Hardie Grant London Ltd v Aspden UKEAT/0242/11/RN
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.