Case 6000322/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Samuel Ball v Rowley Manor Lifestyles UK Limited (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) Heard: by CVP — 2024
- Case reference
- 6000322/2024
- Decision date
- 17 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ayre Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Samuel Ball
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by the respondent as a Second Chef from 1 April 2023 and was promoted to Kitchen Manager in August 2023, remaining in employment until 30 December 2023. The respondent did not enter a response to the claim and did not attend the hearing; shortly before the hearing a solicitor for the liquidator wrote to the Tribunal asserting that the claimant had been self-employed. On the evidence of the claimant and his brother, the Employment Judge found that the claimant was an employee, that he had never asked to be self-employed, and that he reported to and took instructions from a director of the respondent.
The Tribunal found that during the last three months of his employment the claimant was entitled to net wages of £6,988.46 but had received only £6,866.16 in total, and that the first £3,866.43 of those payments represented reimbursement for stock purchased at Makro (£2,097.86) and wages paid by the claimant to other staff (£1,768.57). The balance left £2,999.73 attributable to wages, producing an unauthorised deduction of £3,988.73. Applying Regulation 14(3) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, the claimant was entitled to 21 days' accrued holiday pay at a daily rate of £110.61, totalling £2,322.81 gross.
The respondent had failed to provide itemised pay statements contrary to s.8 ERA 1996, and the Tribunal ordered payment of the unnotified deductions of £1,872.42 under s.12(4) ERA 1996. The respondent had also failed to provide a statement of initial employment particulars or a statement of changes on promotion, in breach of ss.1 and 4 ERA 1996, and the Tribunal considered it just and equitable to award four weeks' pay under s.38 Employment Act 2002, capped at the statutory weekly maximum of £643, giving £2,572.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions from wages during the last three months of employment; ordered net sum of £3,988.73. | Upheld | — | £3,989 |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations 1998; £2,322.81 gross, less tax and NI, calculated using Regulation 14(3). | Upheld | — | £2,323 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Failure to provide itemised pay statements under s.8 ERA 1996; award of £1,872.42 for unnotified deductions under s.12(4) ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £1,872 |
| Other | Failure to provide a statement of employment particulars under ss.1 and 4 ERA 1996; four weeks' pay awarded under s.38 Employment Act 2002, capped at £643/week = £2,572. | Upheld | — | £2,572 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,755
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
7 references- Regulation 14(3) Working Time Regulations 1998
- section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 12(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 4 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- Rule 21 ET 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.