Case 6013995/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Stanyer v Tom Bainbridge Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6013995/2025
- Decision date
- 18 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough
Parties
2 namedMr R Stanyer
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningRule 22 default judgment by Employment Judge Ainscough following the respondent's failure to present a valid response on time. The respondent's name was amended to Tom Bainbridge Ltd to reflect its correct corporate name, and the Employment Judge determined the matter could properly be determined under Rule 22.
The tribunal upheld the unauthorised deduction from wages claim in the gross sum of £12,463.97. The calculation was based on the contractual annual salary of £36,000 gross applied over 21 weeks and 1 day from 9 September 2024 to 3 February 2025 (giving £14,676.97 gross), with credit given for £2,213 received on account during the period.
The respondent had also failed to provide written itemised pay statements as required by s.8 Employment Rights Act 1996; as the shortfall was already covered by the deduction award no further sum was made on that basis. The accrued but untaken holiday claim was upheld in the sum of £1,592.18 (11.5 days x £138.46 gross per day; the calculation in the judgment as £1,592.31 was rounded to £1,592.18 in the order). The total ordered was £14,056.28. The 18 August 2025 hearing was cancelled in consequence.
Claims and outcomes
3 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £12,464 |
| Other | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Upheld | — | £1,592 |
Legal tests applied
3 referencesRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,056
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.