Case 6001979/2025 · Employment Tribunal
B Goncalves v Rhondda Hospitality Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6001979/2025
- Decision date
- 4 August 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
B Goncalves
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld B Goncalves's complaints of unauthorised deduction from wages and unpaid holiday pay. Rhondda Hospitality Limited had failed to pay her for the final month of her employment and for accrued untaken holiday on termination. The tribunal ordered payment of £1,824 in wage arrears and £456 in holiday pay. The two awards total £2,280.
The claim was presented on 20 January 2025. The respondent's response was rejected because it was late, and the respondent sought neither reconsideration nor an extension of time. With no valid response, the claim proceeded under rule 22. Neither party attended the hearing on 4 August 2026. After the clerk tried to contact both parties and neither had attended or contacted the tribunal by 10.30am, the judge proceeded under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.
Both parties agreed that wage arrears and holiday pay were owed, although the respondent's late ET3 gave lower figures. The judge accepted the amounts in the claimant's ET1, reasoning that the respondent appeared now to accept those figures because it had neither applied for an extension of time to present its response nor attended the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,824 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £456 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,280
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.