Mr J Wallis v Selman Marine Design Ltd — 2025

The respondent did not lodge a response. On the material before the tribunal, the Employment Judge was satisfied that the case could be determined without a hearing on liability. The claimant’s account that he had not been paid since February 2025 and had received no correspondence from the respondent since March 2025, leading him to resign on 1 August 2025, was not contradicted by any defence.

The tribunal found that a failure to pay an employee or offer work is a fundamental breach of contract and therefore accepted that the claimant had been dismissed within s95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. In the absence of any response from the respondent, the tribunal found there was no basis to conclude that there was a potentially fair reason for dismissal, and held that the claimant was unfairly dismissed under s98 of the 1996 Act.

On remedy, the claimant sought only a basic award for unfair dismissal and did not seek a compensatory award. Although the judgment records a reference to 'redundancy pay', the tribunal noted that the claimant had not been made redundant, but that statutory redundancy pay and the basic award in unfair dismissal are calculated using the same formula. Using the claimant’s age and length of service, the tribunal calculated 23.5 weeks’ pay capped at £719, producing a basic award of £16,896.50.

For wages, the tribunal found nothing to dispute the sums claimed. It awarded £2,781.88 for June 2025 and £2,781.88 for July 2025, making £5,563.76 in respect of unauthorised deductions from wages.