Claimant v Malachi Aniemeka
Outcome
Individual claims
Tribunal entered judgment under Rule 22 as respondent failed to file a response. The tribunal found the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages in June and July 2024.
Tribunal entered judgment under Rule 22 as respondent failed to file a response. The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay notice pay to the claimant.
Facts
Ms Peters brought claims against Mr Aniemeka for unauthorised deductions from wages in June and July 2024 and for failure to pay notice pay. The respondent failed to file a response to the claim and did not attend the hearing.
Decision
The tribunal entered judgment under Rule 22 in favour of the claimant as the respondent had failed to file a response. The tribunal found the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages and failed to pay notice pay, ordering payment of £436.
Practical note
When a respondent fails to file an ET3 response, the tribunal can enter default judgment under Rule 22, finding the claims well-founded without requiring full evidential proof.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6012417/2024
- Decision date
- 14 February 2025
- Hearing type
- rule 21
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- default
Respondent
- Name
- Malachi Aniemeka
- Sector
- —
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No