Claimant v Impact Business Shared Services Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
Default judgment under Rule 22 as respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Tribunal determined claimants were owed unpaid wages as claimed.
Default judgment under Rule 22 as respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Tribunal found respondent failed to pay accrued holiday entitlement to most claimants.
Default judgment under Rule 22. Most claimants were dismissed in breach of contract regarding notice pay. One claimant (Bryony James) successfully proved breach but received no damages due to mitigation through benefits and new employment.
Default judgment under Rule 22. Several claimants (Maisie Roe, Brendan Harper, Richard Todd, Francesca Finch, Luke Bygrave, James Hudson, Elisha Hickin, Mia Penson) were dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to statutory redundancy payments.
Facts
Twenty-four claimants brought claims against Impact Business Shared Services Ltd filed on 8 October 2024. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The claimants sought unpaid wages, holiday pay, notice pay, and in some cases redundancy payments following the termination of their employment.
Decision
The Employment Judge issued a default judgment under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure in favor of all claimants. Awards totaling £163,816.66 were made across the 24 claimants for unlawful deduction of wages, holiday pay, notice pay, and redundancy payments. One claimant's notice pay claim succeeded but no damages were awarded due to successful mitigation.
Practical note
Employers who fail to respond to tribunal claims face automatic default judgments, resulting in liability for all claimed sums including unpaid wages, holiday pay, notice pay, and statutory redundancy.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3311092/2024
- Decision date
- 23 May 2025
- Hearing type
- rule 21
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- default
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No