Case 6002565/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Benjamin Hallam v ARS Hotels Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 6002565/2024
- Decision date
- 19 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge H Clark Representation
- Venue
- London Central via Cloud Video Platform
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Benjamin Hallam
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard on 15 August 2024 at London Central via the Cloud Video Platform before Employment Judge H Clark. The respondent did not appear or file a response. The tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully deducted £2,115.36 from the claimant’s wages and had also unlawfully deducted £1,634.55 from the claimant’s wages by way of accrued annual leave payments.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was entitled to damages for breach of contract in relation to expenses in the sum of £104.17. The judgment records these findings as the sole substantive determinations and does not set out any separate legal test or further reasoning beyond the stated outcomes. The total monetary sum awarded by the judgment is £3,854.08.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,115 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this deduction as being by way of accrued annual leave payments. | Upheld | — | £1,635 |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract finding was stated to relate to expenses. | Upheld | — | £104 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,854
- across all upheld claims
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.