Mr L Linley v Blue Jay Recruitment Services Ltd: 1803524/2022
JUDGMENT
The response is struck out.REASONS
[1]By a letter dated 23 March 2023 the Tribunal gave the respondent an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing, as to why the response should not be struck out because: the respondent had not complied with the Order of the Tribunal dated 6 February 2023. it has not been actively pursued.[2]The respondent 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 response is therefore struck out.[3]The respondent will be entitled to notice of any hearings and decisions of the Tribunal but will only be entitled to participate in any hearing to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge. Employment Judge Shepherd Date: 12 April 2023 Case No: 1803524/2022 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr L Linley Respondent: Blue Jay Recruitment Services Limited Heard at: Leeds by CVP On: 24 May 2023 Before: Employment Judge Tegerdine Representation Claimant: In person Respondent: Did not attend[4]The claimant’s average gross weekly pay while he was employed by the respondent was £840 per week. When the claimant’s employment terminated he was therefore entitled to a payment of £3,528.00 in respect of his 4.2 weeks’ accrued but untaken holiday. However, the respondent did not make any payment to the claimant in respect of accrued but untaken holiday.[5]The respondent shall pay to the claimant the gross sum of £3,528.00 being the amount of the unauthorised deduction from wages properly payable to the claimant in respect of 4.2 weeks’ accrued but untaken holiday pay owed to the claimant for the period up to 26 July 2022.[6]The respondent shall pay the sum due to the claimant on or before 7 June 2023.