L Golding v Science Card Ltd: 2305188/2025 and 2306704/2025
JUDGMENT
[1]Claim 2306704/2025 is struck out as an abuse of process on the basis that it is a duplicate of claim 2305188/2025.[2]The complaint(s) of whistleblowing in 2305188/2025 is struck out on the basis that it has no reasonable prospect of success, since no details have been provided.REASONS
[1]On 9 June 2025 Ms Golding submitted a claim against the respondent for notice pay, unpaid wages and for whistleblowing. That claim has been given case number 2305188/2025.[2]The same claim form named Mr Daniel Sale as a second claimant. That second claim was given case number 2305189/2025.[3]Mr Sale also submitted a separate claim form, on 19 July 2025, for unpaid wages. That claim has been given case number 2306703/2025.[4]He has also included Ms Golding on that claim form. That second claim has been given this case number - 2306704/2025.[5]The result is that four claims have been brought in total.[6]By letter dated 31 July 2025 I asked the claimant to confirm whether she was pursing both claims and if so why. Case Numbers 2305188/2025 & 2306704/2025 Page 2 of 2[7]No reply has been received and so the second claim appears to be an unintended duplicate. It is dismissed as an abuse of process.[8]Further, in that letter the claimant was also asked to confirm whether she is pursuing a whistleblowing claim and if so why, no particulars having been provided. In each case the claimant was informed of the possibility that the complaint may be struck out but again, no response has been received. Employment Judge Fowell Date 07 November 2025 Case Number 2305188/2025 Page 1 of 2 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Heard at: Croydon (by video) On: 2 March 2026 Claimant: Ms Leigh Golding Respondent: Science Card Limited Before: Employment Judge Eoin Fowell Representation: Claimant In Person Respondent Mr D Baeriswyl, Director[1]The claimant brings claims of breach of contract and of unlawful deduction from wages.[2]The breach of contract claim relates to her notice pay, a period of one month, and the wages claim relates to the previous month’s pay. The total amount due is therefore two months’ wages.[3]Liability is not disputed and judgment is given for the claimant on both claims.[4]The respondent is ordered to pay the claimant her unpaid wages, including notice pay, in the sum of £10,666.66. (No separate sum is ordered for breach of contract.)[5]The award for unlawful deduction from wages falls within the definition of earnings at section 62 of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003. Accordingly, the respondent is obliged to treat it as wages and to account to HMRC for any tax and national insurance. The net amount is to be paid directly to the claimant. Case Number 2305188/2025 Page 2 of 2[6]Credit must be given by the claimant from that net amount as follows:(a) for the sum of £1,328 already paid in relation to a proposed settlement of the claim;(b) for the sum of £750, deducted by agreement between the parties, for the value of IT equipment retained by the claimant.[7]The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to award interest.