Case 3320624/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Croucher v Pang (UK) Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3320624/2019
- Decision date
- 3 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Warren Representation
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Croucher
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Bury St Edmunds on 3 January 2020 before Employment Judge M Warren, the claimant, Mr G Croucher, appeared in person and the respondent, Pang (UK) Ltd, was represented by its director. The tribunal amended the respondent’s name to Pang (UK) Ltd and gave judgment orally, with written reasons not provided unless requested within 14 days.
The tribunal upheld the claimant’s claim for unpaid wages and ordered the respondent to pay £1,575 in respect of that claim. It also found that the respondent failed to provide the claimant with written terms and conditions of employment and ordered payment of two weeks’ pay in the sum of £576.92. The judgment records a total payable of £2,151.92, payable without deduction and taxable in the claimant’s hands.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claimant’s claim for unpaid wages succeeded and orders payment of £1,575. | Upheld | — | £1,575 |
| Other | The judgment states that the respondent failed to provide written terms and conditions of employment and orders payment of two weeks’ pay of £576.92. | Upheld | — | £577 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,152
- across all upheld claims
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.