Claimant v Care Mithra Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The Respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure, the claim was determined in the Claimant's favour on the papers. The tribunal found the Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages.
The Respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure, the claim was determined in the Claimant's favour on the papers. The tribunal found the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant's holiday entitlement.
Facts
The Claimant filed a claim on 5 June 2024 in the South East Region Employment Tribunal alleging unauthorised deductions from wages and failure to pay holiday entitlement. The Respondent, Care Mithra Ltd, failed to present a valid response within the required time limit. The Employment Judge determined the claim could be decided under rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure without a hearing.
Decision
Employment Judge Graham granted default judgment in favour of the Claimant because the Respondent failed to file a valid response. The tribunal ordered the Respondent to pay £2,483.76 gross for unauthorised deductions from wages and £343.85 for unpaid holiday entitlement, totalling £2,827.61.
Practical note
Where a respondent fails to submit a valid response on time, a tribunal can make a default judgment under rule 21 in favour of the claimant on the papers without a hearing.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3305676/2024
- Decision date
- 13 May 2025
- Hearing type
- rule 21
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- default
Respondent
- Name
- Care Mithra Ltd
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No