Mr Z Khechni v Rhytik Leisure Ltd: 2214129/2023
JUDGMENT
Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21[1]The claim was issued in the Central London Employment Tribunals on 29 August 2023. The Respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim, or part of it, in accordance with rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure.[2]The Claimant’s claims of unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions from wages succeed. The remedy to which the Claimant is entitled will be determined at a Remedy Hearing. Notice of the Remedy Hearing will be sent to the parties. _____________________________ Employment Judge Brown Date: 11 November 2024[1]Under the provisions of Rule 69 of the Employment Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure 2013, the Judgment sent to the parties on 20 November 2024 is corrected as shown in bold at paragraph 4 below:-[2]The claim was issued in the Central London Employment Tribunals on 29 August 2023. The Respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim, or part of it, in accordance with rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure.[3]The Claimant’s claim of unlawful deductions from wages succeeds. The remedy to which the Claimant is entitled will be determined at a Remedy Hearing. Notice of the Remedy Hearing will be sent to the parties.[4]The Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal is dismissed. By reason of the Claimant’s length of service, the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to hear this part of his claim. Case Number 2214129/2023 REMEDY JUDGMENT The Claimant is entitled to an award of unpaid wages in the sum of £391. He is further entitled, by way of statutory notice, to payment of a week’s pay in the sum of £195.50. Judgment is thus awarded to the Claimant in the sum of £586.50REASONS
[1]This is the hearing of the Claimant’s remedy claim, default judgment having been entered by the Employment Tribunal on 20 November 2024 by reason of the Respondent’s failure to present a response. The Respondent did not attend today’s hearing or make any written representations in advance.[2]The Claimant attended in person. He submitted two documents in electronic format during the hearing and made reference to the same in the course of his evidence: an excerpt from his bank statement detailing payments of wages made by the Respondent and a job advertisement which made reference to features of the role which the Claimant performed, including the potential to earn commission on sales.[3]The Claimant gave evidence at the hearing by way of affirmation. He accepted that he was unable to pursue a complaint of unfair dismissal because of his insufficient length of service, but wished to claim compensation, in circumstances where his employment was terminated without payment of statutory notice. He also sought compensation for unpaid wages and bonus as detailed in his claim form.Findings of Fact
[4]The Claimant was employed by the Respondent, a retailer of tennis equipment and related goods, in the role of sales assistant. His employment was for 23 hours per week at an hourly rate of £8.50. The Claimant’s employment was terminated summarily on 10 June 2023, without payment of a week’s statutory notice.[5]At the time of his dismissal, the Claimant was owed £391 in unpaid wages. The Claimant believes that the reason he was dismissed was because he protested about his outstanding pay entitlement.[6]The Claimant claims, in addition to the above sums, a bonus payment in the sum of £50. He believes that a fellow worker, who achieved similar sales to himself, was provided with a commission bonus in this amount. The Claimant was not informed of Case Number 2214129/2023 a specific threshold of sales that would attract commission, nor of the basis of calculation of any such bonus.[7]The Claimant is entitled to an award of unpaid wages in the sum of £391. He is further entitled to a week’s pay, by way of statutory notice, in the sum of £195.50. The Claimant has not established a right to receive a bonus payment in the sum of £50, and this element of his claim is not allowed.