Case 3324479/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Burton v And Fifth Zone Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3324479/2019
- Decision date
- 20 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Vowles Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Burton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response to the claim, and judgment was entered for the claimant under Rule 21 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. On that basis, the tribunal awarded the claimant £1,399.12 for unpaid wages and £310.00 for holiday pay.
The tribunal also found that Fifth Zone Limited was in breach of the duty to give a written statement of initial employment particulars. For that breach, the claimant was awarded 2 weeks’ pay of £850.00. The total award recorded by the judgment was £2,559.12.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment’s first substantive heading was 'Unpaid Wages and Holiday Pay'. Under that heading, the tribunal recorded that the claimant was owed wages of £1,399.12 and awarded compensation for that sum. | Upheld | — | £1,399 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment’s first substantive heading was 'Unpaid Wages and Holiday Pay'. Under that heading, the tribunal recorded holiday pay of £310.00 and awarded compensation for that sum. | Upheld | — | £310 |
| Other | The tribunal found a breach of the duty to give a written statement of initial employment particulars and awarded 2 weeks’ pay of £850.00. The judgment does not map this to a standard claim type in the locked taxonomy. | Upheld | — | £850 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,559
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.