Case 3313650/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v In person. — 2023
- Case reference
- 3313650/2022
- Decision date
- 1 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hunt Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Watford before Employment Judge Hunt, found in accordance with Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 that the claimant's unlawful deduction of wages claim was well-founded. The judgment records that the respondent unlawfully failed to pay the claimant for time spent on annual leave, notably between 31 August and 5 September 2022, and also failed to make a payment in lieu of accrued annual leave on termination.
The tribunal also found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant for the period he was suspended, when he was entitled to full pay, notably between 3 and 19 August 2022 inclusive. It awarded £2,184 gross for the annual leave / holiday pay element and £1,622.40 gross for the suspension pay element, making a total award of £3,806.40 gross.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held the Part II ERA 1996 unlawful deduction of wages claim well-founded. It awarded £2,184 gross for unpaid annual leave / payment in lieu of accrued annual leave and £1,622.40 gross for unpaid suspension pay while the claimant was entitled to full pay. | Upheld | — | £3,806 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,806
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.