Claimant v Sasa Super Foods Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the complaint well-founded under Rule 22 as the respondent failed to file ET3 grounds of resistance and did not appear. The claimant was awarded £3180.32 gross for unauthorised deductions from wages.
The tribunal found the complaint in relation to notice pay well-founded. The respondent was ordered to pay £430.35 as damages for breach of contract, calculated using gross pay to reflect Post Employment Notice Pay.
The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay the claimant in accordance with regulation 14(2) and/or 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The claimant was awarded £503.31 in holiday pay.
The tribunal found the respondent failed to give the claimant written itemised pay statements as required by section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996 in the period May and June 2024.
Facts
Mr Sultana brought claims against Sasa Super Foods Ltd for unauthorised deductions from wages totalling £3180.32, unpaid notice pay, unpaid holiday pay, and failure to provide itemised pay statements for May and June 2024. The respondent failed to file an ET3 response or attend the hearing.
Decision
The tribunal made a Rule 22 judgment in favour of the claimant on all claims, awarding a total of £4113.98 comprising unpaid wages, notice pay, and holiday pay. The tribunal also declared that the respondent failed to provide written itemised pay statements as required by law.
Practical note
Where a respondent fails to file an ET3 and does not attend the hearing, a tribunal will make a Rule 22 default judgment in favour of the claimant if the claims are properly founded on the evidence presented.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6013195/2024
- Decision date
- 18 February 2025
- Hearing type
- rule 21
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- default
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No