Case 6020084/2025 · Employment Tribunal
B Southern v The Pit King Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6020084/2025
- Decision date
- 29 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop
Parties
2 namedB Southern
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Dunlop determined this Rule 22 default judgment after the respondent (The Pit King Limited) failed to present a valid response on time. The claim was presented in the Manchester Employment Tribunal on 29 May 2025.
The Judge found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded for the period 31 March to 6 April 2025 (£170.94) and for two hours of work collecting shutter lock and keys (£24.42), plus statutory sick pay of £356.25 for 16 April to 4 May 2025. The breach of contract complaint regarding notice pay was upheld with damages of £366.30 (one week's statutory notice), plus £4 of unpaid expenses (bus fare). The complaint of holiday pay was upheld for 16.2 hours of accrued but untaken leave at £12.21 per hour (£197.81).
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant a total of £1,119.72. No award was made for additional compensation described by the claimant, the Tribunal having no jurisdiction to award such compensation in the circumstances.
Claims and outcomes
3 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £552 |
| Breach of contract | Upheld | — | £370 |
| Holiday pay | Upheld | — | £198 |
Legal tests applied
1 referenceRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,120
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.