Claimant v BPS Solicitors Ltd (in creditors voluntary liquidation)
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the first respondent failed to pay the claimant for 16 days of work at the gross daily rate of £173.08, constituting an unauthorised deduction of wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal determined that the claimant was entitled to 5 days' statutory notice pay under section 86 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The first respondent failed to pay this notice pay, and the claim was well founded.
The claimant had accrued 4.43 days of untaken annual leave on termination. The first respondent failed to pay for this accrued holiday pay in accordance with regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and the tribunal upheld the claim.
Facts
The claimant was employed by BPS Solicitors Ltd from 1 June 2024 to 22 August 2024 on a salary of £45,000 per annum. The first respondent failed to pay the claimant for 16 days of work, failed to pay statutory notice pay for a 5-day notice period, and failed to pay accrued holiday pay of 4.43 days on termination. The first respondent, now in creditors voluntary liquidation, did not present a response to the claim.
Decision
The tribunal issued a default judgment under Rule 22 in favour of the claimant, finding all claims well founded. The tribunal ordered the first respondent to pay unpaid wages of £2,769.28, notice pay of £865.40, and holiday pay of £766.74, totalling £4,401.42.
Practical note
Default judgments under Rule 22 can be issued on paper where an insolvent respondent fails to respond, with awards limited to clearly calculable contractual and statutory entitlements.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 5.1 weeks' gross pay
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2406949/2024
- Decision date
- 15 September 2025
- Hearing type
- rule 21
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- default
Respondent
- Sector
- legal services
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Salary band
- £40,000–£50,000
- Service
- 3 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No