Case 6020990/2024 · Employment Tribunal
J B Lord v The Takeaway Group Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6020990/2024
- Decision date
- 22 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspinall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
J B Lord
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Aspinall, sitting alone under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024, found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £390.00 for 32.5 hours of unpaid work performed between Monday 21 and Friday 25 October 2024 at £12.00 per hour.
The Tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £101.40 for 8.45 hours of accrued annual leave at £12.00 per hour. The hearing previously listed for 26 February 2025 was cancelled.
The judgment was approved on 20 January 2025 and sent to the parties on 22 January 2025. A notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 was issued, identifying 22 January 2025 as the relevant decision day and 23 January 2025 as the calculation day, with interest accruing at the stipulated rate of 8% per annum if the sums are not paid within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross sum of £390.00 for 32.5 hours unpaid work between 21 and 25 October 2024 at £12.00 per hour. | Upheld | — | £390 |
| Holiday pay | £101.40 for 8.45 hours of accrued annual leave at £12.00 per hour. Stored as integer GBP (rounded from £101.40). | Upheld | — | £101 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £491
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024 - Rule 22
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, Article 12
- Judgments Act 1838, s.17
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.