Claimant v C R Swift Landscaping Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Struck out on the basis that the claimant had less than two years' service required for unfair dismissal jurisdiction.
Struck out on the basis that the claimant had less than two years' service required for statutory redundancy pay entitlement.
Claimant did not attend to prove his case. Respondent provided payslips demonstrating payment for all shifts the claimant claimed were unpaid. Tribunal found no evidence of unpaid wages for shifts worked.
Claimant did not provide evidence of unpaid accrued holiday. Respondent demonstrated the claimant had been paid for 20 days holiday against an entitlement of 12.3 days pro rata for the final leave year, meaning the claimant had already been overpaid.
Claimant ticked box for notice pay but provided no explanation. Respondent did not terminate employment; claimant simply stopped attending. No evidence claimant was ready and willing to work during notice period. Claim dismissed.
Facts
The claimant was employed as a worker from 29 March 2022 to 21 December 2023, working on average 3 days per week at £110 per day shift or £150 per night shift. He claimed unpaid wages, holiday pay and notice pay, filing two tribunal claims in February and March 2024. The claimant failed to attend the full merits hearing despite notice and efforts to contact him, and the tribunal proceeded in his absence. The respondent produced comprehensive payslips, holiday records and shift schedules demonstrating payment for all shifts worked and holidays taken.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims. The unlawful deduction of wages claim failed because the respondent demonstrated through payslips that all shifts the claimant claimed were unpaid had in fact been paid. The holiday pay claim failed because the claimant had been paid for 20 days against an entitlement of only 12.3 days pro rata. The notice pay claim failed because the claimant simply stopped attending work rather than being dismissed, and provided no evidence he was ready and willing to work a notice period.
Practical note
Claimants must attend hearings and provide evidence to discharge the burden of proof, particularly for wage claims where employers maintain proper records including payslips and holiday schedules.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3200372/2024
- Decision date
- 19 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No