Mrs L Hartwell v Atrium Investment Group Ltd T/a Lord Recruitment and others: 2405156/2017
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant’s application to amend her claim to add as Mollie Stewart-Dodds (trading as Lord Recruitment) as a respondent is granted.[2]The hearing of the claimant’s claim is postponed to be re-listed.REASONS
[1]The claimant’s claim is for unauthorised deductions from wages and accrued but unpaid holiday pay due to her for her period of employment with an undertaking which traded as Lord Recruitment.[2]The response of the first respondent was that the claimant was not employed by that company and that it was not associated or trading as Lord Recruitment.[3]At the hearing the claimant referred to an email from her former manager at Lord Recruitment which suggested that the second respondent owned and operated that business. It appears that Ms Stewart-Dodds is also a director of the first respondent. The claimant told me that both businesses operated from the same premises. It is also possible that a Mr Abadi was or is in partnership with Ms Stewart-Dodds. If that turns out to be the position and it is that partnership that operated Lord Recruitment, he may be required to be joined as party to the Case No. 2405156/2017 proceedings as well. At this stage it was not clear to me whether or not he was a partner and accordingly I have not joined him as a respondent at this stage.[4]I note that the response of the first respondent does not acknowledge that Lord Recruitment operated from the same premises. It does not disclose any connection between the second respondent and Lord Recruitment. It is open to the second respondent in any response which is filed by her on her behalf to demonstrate that there was no such connection if that be the case.[5]In order to afford a proper opportunity for the correct facts to be established and the position of all parties protected I decided to postpone the hearing in order to afford the second respondent the chance to serve a response. The hearing will be relisted in due course. _____________________________ Employment Judge Tom Ryan Date_________ 24 November 2017________[1]Atrium Investment Group Limited T/A Lord Recruitment[2]Mollie Stewart-Dodds T/A Lord Recruitment HELD AT: Manchester ON: 24 November 2017 BEFORE: Employment Judge Tom Ryan REPRESENTATION: Claimant: Respondent: In person No attendance CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION issued under rule 69 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 In the Judgment sent to the parties on 28 November 2017 “Case No. 2405156/2017” is substituted for “Case No. 2405186/2017” as shown in the corrected judgment annexed hereto. _____________________________ Employment Judge Tom Ryan Date_________ 21 March 2018________ SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 12 April 2018 FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE Case No. 2405156/2017 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mrs L Hartwell Respondents: Atrium Investment Group Ltd t/a Lord Recruitment Mollie Stewart-Dodds t/a Lord Recruitment[3]Mr A Abadi t/a Lord Recruitment Heard at: Manchester On: 13 April 2018 Before: Employment Judge Sharkett (sitting alone) REPRESENTATION: Claimant: Respondents: In person No attendance from any of the respondents[1]The title of the third respondent in these proceedings is amended to Mr A Abadi t/a Lord Recruitment.[2]The claimant was employed by the third respondent.[3]The complaint under the Working Time Regulations 1998 succeeds and the third respondent is ordered to pay the claimant the gross sum of £142.80 in respect of annual leave accrued but untaken at termination of employment. Case No. 2405156/2017 2[4]The complaint of unlawful deduction of wages succeeds and the third respondent is ordered to pay the claimant the sum of £346.15 in respect of that unauthorised deduction.[5]The total sum payable by the third respondent to the claimant is £488.95.