K Hofberg v Savour Bakery Cafe & Patisserie Ltd: 2500534/2025
JUDGMENT
PURSUANT TO RULE 22 OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS RULES OF PROCEDURE 2024(1) The claim for notice pay (breach of contract) is well founded and succeeds. The Respondent is ordered to pay the Claimant damages of £1,489.62.(2) The claim for unlawful deduction of wages (arrears of pay) is well founded and succeeds. The Respondent is ordered to pay the Claimant the gross sum of £12.92.(3) The claim for payment of holiday pay outstanding on termination of employment under regulation 30 Working Time Regulations 1998 is well founded and succeeds. The Respondent is ordered to pay the Claimant the gross sum of £199.(4) The total amount to be paid to the Claimant is £1,701.54REASONS
[1]The Claimant presented an ET1 against the Respondent on 29 May 2025. A Response was due by 02 July 2025 but none was returned. On 17 July 2025, Judge Arullendran directed that the ET1 be reserved as she was not satisfied the claim had been served at the correct address. The Registered office address on the ET1 was amended to 207 Coatsworth Road, Gateshead. The Respondent was then given until 21 August 2025 to return a Response. None was returned.[2]The Claimant claimed that he was owed:a. Notice pay,b. Holiday pay and Case number: 2500534/2025c. Arrears of pay[3]Under rule 22 of the Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 where on the expiry of the time limit in rule 17 no response has been presented and no application for a reconsideration is outstanding, an employment Judge must decide whether on the available material, a determination can properly be made of the claim or part of it. If there is, the judge must issue a judgment, otherwise a hearing must be fixed before a judge alone.[4]The Claimant was employed by the Respondent as front of house staff from 09 December 2024 to 17 April 2025.[5]His contract of employment entitled him to four weeks notice of termination or a payment in lieu of notice (‘PILON’). Contracted to work 36 hours a week, he in fact worked a minimum of six days a week.[6]The Claimant was entitled to payment at the rate of £12.21 an hour. Between 01 and 17 April 2025, the Claimant worked 61.5 hours. Payment for that period was made 19 days after it was properly payable. Not only was it late but he was paid less than the amount that was properly payable. The amount properly payable was £750.92. The amount actually paid was £729.28. thus there was a shortfall of £12.92.[7]He was entitled to 28 days’ annual leave a year. His holiday year ran from 01 January to 31 December. As at the date of termination of employment he had accrued 41.8 hours holiday and had taken 25.5 hours, leaving a balance of 16.3 hours accrued but untaken as at the date of termination. At a rate of £21.21 an hour, he was entitled to a payment in respect of this accrued untaken holiday amounting to £199.[8]The Claimant’s employment was terminated by a WhatsApp message with no notice on 17 April 2025. Had he been paid notice or a PILON, he would have been paid £1,489.62. However, no notice was given and no PILON was made.[9]The Claimant provided further information to the Tribunal in support of his claims as directed. I was satisfied that I had sufficient information to issue a judgment under rule 22 of the ET Rules. Approved by: