Mr T Walker v Whitehaven Rugby League Football Club (2010) Ltd: 2411759/2023

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case No 2411759/2023

Between

Mr T WalkerClaimant

Whitehaven Rugby League Football Club (2010) LimitedRespondent

Before

Employment Judge Phil Allen

Date 26 February 2024

JUDGMENT

Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21

[1]The name of the respondent is amended to Whitehaven Rugby League Football Club (2010) Limited to reflect the correct title of the respondent.

[2]The respondent has made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages for the months of July, August, September and October 2023, and is ordered to pay the claimant the net sum of £2,848 (£712 net pay per month x 4 months = £2,848).

[3]The hearing listed on 24 June 2024 is cancelled. Employment Judge Phil Allen Date: 26 February 2024

[1]There is more information about Tribunal judgments here, which you should read with this guidance note: www.gov.uk/government/publications/employment-tribunal-hearings-judgment-guide-t426 If you do not have access to the internet, you can ask for a paper copy by telephoning the Tribunal office dealing with the claim.

[2]The payment of interest on Employment Tribunal awards is governed by The Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990. Interest is payable on Employment Tribunal awards if they remain wholly or partly unpaid more than 14 days after the relevant decision day. Sums in the award that represent costs or expenses are excluded. Interest starts to accrue from the day immediately after the relevant decision day, which is called the calculation day.

[3]The date of the relevant decision day in your case is set out in the Notice. If the judgment is paid in full by that date, no interest will be payable. If the judgment is not paid in full by that date, interest will start to accrue from the next day.

[4]Requesting written reasons after you have received a written judgment does not change the date of the relevant decision day.

[5]Interest will be calculated as simple interest accruing from day to day on any part of the sum of money awarded by the Tribunal that remains unpaid.

[6]If the person paying the Tribunal award is required to pay part of it to a public authority by way of tax or National Insurance, no interest is payable on that part.

[7]If the Secretary of State has claimed any part of the sum awarded by the Tribunal in a recoupment notice, no interest is payable on that part.

[8]If the sum awarded is varied, either because the Tribunal reconsiders its own judgment, or following an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal or a higher court, interest will still be payable from the calculation day but it will be payable on the new sum not the sum originally awarded.

[9]The online information explains how Employment Tribunal awards are enforced. The interest element of an award is enforced in the same way. Case No: 2411759/2023 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr T Walker Respondent: Whitehaven Rugby League Football Club (2010) Limited RECONSIDERATION JUDGMENT The email from the respondent’s CEO of 4 March 2024 has been treated as an application for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 27 February 2024. The application is refused.

REASONS

[1]An application for reconsideration is an exception to the general principle that (subject to appeal on a point of law) a decision of an Employment Tribunal is final. The test is whether it is necessary in the interests of justice to reconsider the judgment (rule 70).

[2]The Court of Appeal in Ministry of Justice v Burton

[2016] EWCA Civ 714

has emphasised the importance of finality, which militates against the discretion being exercised too readily.

[3]The claim in this case was served on the respondent with a letter dated 22 November 2023, which gave the respondent until 20 December 2023 to respond.

[4]No response was received.

[5]A Judgment was issued for the sums claimed.

[6]No application to extend time for the submission of the response has ever been received. No response form (or draft response form) has ever been provided.

[7]The email received from the respondent’s CEO says that it disputes the findings. The email says that a settlement was concluded between the parties on 19 December 2023. A copy of the purported settlement has been attached, which is a document dated 19 December 2023. Notably, the document provided Case No: 2411759/2023 is neither a COT3 agreement entered into with the assistance of ACAS, nor does it appear to be a valid settlement agreement entered into in accordance with the provisions of section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. In accordance with the provisions of section 203, the agreement appears to be void to the extent that it purports to exclude or limit the application of any proceedings brought under the Employment Rights Act 1996.

[8]In summary: the Judgment was validly issued, the respondent having not entered a response; no application to extend time for a response has been made and no draft response form has been provided; and the agreement relied upon as purportedly meaning that a Judgment should not have been issued, appears to be void inasmuch as it is held out to have validly concluded the proceedings issued.

[9]There is accordingly no reasonable prospect of the original decision being revoked. It is not in the interests of justice for the Judgment to be revoked. The application is refused.