Case 6024790/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms. Bethany Paul v Joint Pub Ventures Ltd t/a Weavers Tap — 2025
- Case reference
- 6024790/2025
- Decision date
- 5 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hallen Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms. Bethany Paul
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Respondent failed to enter a Response Form. Employment Judge Hallen, sitting at the East London Hearing Centre on 5 December 2025, considered the Claimant's Claim Form and her emails of 17 and 27 November 2025. Neither party attended.
On that material, the Claimant's claim for unpaid wages and holiday pay succeeded. The Claimant was awarded £118.34 pursuant to Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The judgment does not allocate the sum between the unpaid wages and holiday pay components.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unpaid wages succeeded under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 following the Respondent's failure to enter a Response Form. Judgment does not split the £118.34 award between the unpaid wages and holiday pay claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim succeeded under Rule 22 following the Respondent's failure to enter a Response Form. The £118.34 sum awarded covers both this claim and the unpaid wages claim; the judgment does not split the figure between them. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £118
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.