Case 6034866/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Cook v Timescape Adventures Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6034866/2025
- Decision date
- 21 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Newcastle Employment Tribunal on 21 September 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined that a decision could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure without a hearing.
The Judge found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages, had dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice, and had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant gross amounts of £2,704 for unlawful deductions, £624 for notice pay, and £584.06 for unpaid holiday. The hearing listed for 8 July 2026 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21/22 default judgment: respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Award is gross. | Upheld | — | £2,704 |
| Breach of contract | Damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. Award is gross. | Upheld | — | £624 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday entitlement; gross amount £584.06 rounded to nearest GBP per integer schema. | Upheld | — | £584 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,912
- 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.