Case 6001922/2025 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Neither present nor represented — 2025
- Case reference
- 6001922/2025
- Decision date
- 22 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedIn person
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Glennie determined the case in London Central after the respondent did not appear or send representation. The respondent's name was amended to Browd Medical Limited. The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed on withdrawal.
The Tribunal upheld the claimant's complaints of unlawful deduction from wages (£6,626.09 covering pre- and post-contract periods), unpaid holiday pay (£897.44), breach of contract for non-payment of notice (£961.54), and breach of contract for non-reimbursement of expenses (£761.98), totalling £9,247.05. A 25% uplift for failure to comply with the ACAS Code was applied (£2,311.76).
The Tribunal further found that the respondent had conducted the proceedings unreasonably and made a preparation time order under rule 74 of £675 (15 hours at £45/hour). The total payable to the claimant was £12,233.81.
Claims and outcomes
10 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £6,626 |
| Holiday pay | Upheld | — | £897 |
| Breach of contract | Upheld | — | £962 |
| Breach of contract | Upheld | — | £762 |
| Unfair dismissal | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £6,626 |
| Holiday pay | Upheld | — | £897 |
| Breach of contract | Upheld | — | £962 |
| Breach of contract | Upheld | — | £762 |
Legal tests applied
2 referencesRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,234
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.