Case 6028388/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Clark v Mr Peter McArdle trading as Pike Smith & Kemp — 2025
- Case reference
- 6028388/2025
- Decision date
- 31 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Clark
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Watford Employment Tribunal on 31 July 2025. The Respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge George determined under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure that a determination could properly be made on the claim or part of it.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages and ordered payment of £8,830.57 gross. The Tribunal also found that the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £616.43.
The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant £9,447 in total. The judgment was approved by Employment Judge George on 10 December 2025 and sent to the parties on 26 January 2026.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 22 determination after Respondent failed to present a valid response on time; award of £8,830.57 gross. | Upheld | — | £8,831 |
| Holiday pay | Respondent failed to pay holiday entitlement; award of £616.43. Categorised here as holiday_pay although gov.uk listing tagged it under working_time. | Upheld | — | £616 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,447
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.