Claimant v SD Administration Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The tribunal determined the claim under rule 21 and found the unfair dismissal complaint well-founded. The claimant was unfairly dismissed.
The tribunal found the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages contrary to Part II Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant was not paid for the period 20 November 2023 to 5 January 2025 at a rate of £634.62 per week.
Facts
The claimant was employed by SD Administration Ltd until 6 January 2025. The claimant was not paid for the period 20 November 2023 to 5 January 2025 at a weekly rate of £634.62. The claimant filed a claim on 21 March 2025 for unfair dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time.
Decision
The tribunal determined the claim under rule 21 and rule 22 in the respondent's absence. Both claims succeeded. The claimant was awarded a basic award of £14,913.57, a compensatory award of £1,187.60 (reduced by mitigation earnings), and unpaid wages of £37,351.92 gross, totalling £53,453.09.
Practical note
Default judgments under rule 21 require careful calculation of compensation, including proper accounting for mitigation where the claimant has found alternative employment at comparable or higher rates.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 84.2 weeks' gross pay
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6009820/2025
- Decision date
- 2 October 2025
- Hearing type
- rule 21
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- default
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Salary band
- £30,000–£40,000
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No