Case 6013637/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Michael Clark v Pro Grab Hire Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6013637/2025
- Decision date
- 25 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Michael Clark
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented on 17 April 2025. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined that a decision could properly be made under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. The claimant's same-day application to amend the claim was granted.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages in respect of outstanding pay and his week in hand, and ordered payment of £1,764.49 gross. It also found unauthorised deductions where monies had been taken for pension contributions but were not paid into the claimant's pension, and ordered payment of £874.00.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £308.00. The total sum awarded was £2,946.49.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded for outstanding pay and the claimant's week in hand. | Upheld | — | £1,764 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded for deductions made for pension contributions that were not paid into the claimant's pension. | Upheld | — | £874 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded for unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £308 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,946
- 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.