Case 3321631/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Privilege Care Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3321631/2019
- Decision date
- 12 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a hearing of two unpaid wages claims against Privilege Care Limited. Neither claimant attended, and Employment Judge Hawksworth decided to proceed in their absence under Rule 47 rather than postpone the hearing again. The respondent relied on evidence from its director, Mr Wijesinghe, together with a bundle and supplemental bundle.
Mrs Kauser said her claim related to underpayments for the period 15 August 2017 to 15 December 2017. The tribunal found that the time limit for an unpaid wages claim was three months from the date the payment was due, so the deadline was 14 March 2018. As the claim was presented on 22 August 2019 after early conciliation, it was about 17 months late. No witness statement or other evidence was provided to explain the delay or justify extending time, so the tribunal held that it could not consider the claim and dismissed it.
Mrs Chana did not set out the basis of her claim in her ET1. She told Mr Roddy that she believed she had not been paid the amounts shown on her payslips, but she did not produce bank statements or other evidence to support that assertion. The respondent's director said she had been paid all sums due. The tribunal held that Mrs Chana had not proved unauthorised deductions from wages or a breach of contract in relation to pay, and her claim was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Mrs Kauser's unpaid wages claim related to the period 15 August 2017 to 15 December 2017. The tribunal found it was presented on 22 August 2019, around 17 months out of time, and there was no evidence to extend time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Mrs Chana's unpaid wages claim was not properly explained. She said she had not received the amounts shown on her payslips, but she did not provide bank statements or other evidence to prove unauthorised deductions or a breach of contract about pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47
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.