Case 3313659/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Heuchert v Ten80 Group Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3313659/2022
- Decision date
- 18 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Heuchert
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Watford Employment Tribunal on 20 November 2022. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Shastri decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
On the merits, the tribunal found that Ten80 Group Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £10,666.66 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,969.23 gross. The total amount ordered was £12,635.89 gross, and the claimant was responsible for paying any tax and national insurance.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. | Upheld | — | £10,667 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,969 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,636
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.