Mr T Johnson v KML Security Ltd: 1600006/2022
JUDGMENT
[1]Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21 In the absence of an ET3 response form from the respondent, and there being sufficient material before me to enable a proper determination to be made, I uphold the following claims:• Unpaid Wages (gross): £ 280.00• Unpaid Holiday Pay £ 525.00 The claimant is responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions that may be due on the sums awarded in respect of unpaid wages. I act in accordance with my powers under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure 2013. _____________________________ Employment Judge C Sharp Date: 18 August 2022[2]JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 18 August 2022 ........................................................................ AND ENTERED IN THE REGISTER ......................................................................... FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE C Evans[3]Case Number: 1600006/2022 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr T Johnson Respondent: KML Security Ltd[5]The claim for Breach of Contract (Notice Pay) is struck out.REASONS
[1]By a letter dated 6 July 2022 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing, as to why the claim for notice pay should not be struck out because it has not been actively pursued.[2]The claimant has failed to make representations in writing, or has failed to make any sufficient representations, why this should not be done or to request a hearing. The claim for Notice Pay is therefore struck out. .