Mr N Peters v J Ryan: 2502525/2023
JUDGMENT
[1]The claim for unlawful deduction of wages is well founded and succeeds. The Respondent is ordered to pay the Claimant the gross sum of £1,615.68.REASONS
[2]The Claimant presented an ET1 on 14 November 2023 against Jack Ryan and Aspire Business Group. There was some confusion regarding the identity of the respondents. The ET1 was initially accepted only against Aspire Business Group. This was served on an address in Manchester but it turned out to be a business with a similar name but entirely unrelated to the claimant’s employment. After some further confusion, it was eventually established that the Claimant’s claim was against Jack Ryan trading as Aspire Business Group and the ET1 was amended, identifying Mr Ryan as the correct respondent. The Claim Form was re-served, allowing for time for Mr Ryan to return a response by 05 April 2023. No response was returned.[3]Under rule 21 of the Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, where on the expiry of the time limit in rule 16 no response has been presented and no application for a reconsideration is outstanding, an employment Judge shall decide whether on the available material, a determination can properly be made of the claim or part of it. If there is, the judge shall issue a judgment, otherwise a hearing must be fixed before a judge alone.[4]The Claimant had sent a copy of his contract of employment, signed by Mr Ryan, stating his commencement date and his annual salary of £35,000 a year. His employment started on 20 September 2023 and ended on 05 October 2023.[5]At the date of termination of his employment he had not been in respect of his period of employment. The gross salary for the time he was employed amounted to £1615.68. That amount was properly payable under his contract of employment.[6]I was satisfied that I had sufficient information to issue a judgment under rule 21 of the ET Rules. Case No:2502525/2023