Cases2219978/2024

Claimant v Vape Fusion Ltd

20 September 2024Before Employment Judge Nashon papers

Outcome

Default judgment£6,011

Individual claims

Unlawful Deduction from Wagessucceeded

The respondent failed to file an ET3 response and a Rule 21 default judgment was entered. The tribunal determined from the ET1 and supporting documents that the respondent unlawfully failed to pay wages for February 2024 totalling £4,035.00 to each claimant.

Holiday Paysucceeded

Under Rule 21 default judgment, the tribunal accepted the claimants' case that the respondent failed to pay accrued but untaken holiday pay of £1,676.07 to each claimant, as evidenced in the claim form and supporting documents.

Breach of Contractsucceeded

The tribunal found under Rule 21 that the respondent breached contract by failing to pay expenses of £300.00 to each claimant, as claimed in the ET1 without any response from the respondent.

Facts

Two claimants, Anoosh Patel and Daniel Riman, brought claims against Vape Fusion Ltd for unpaid wages, holiday pay and expenses. The respondent failed to file an ET3 response within the required deadline and did not request an extension of time. Each claimant claimed £4,035.00 in unpaid wages for February 2024, £1,676.07 in accrued but untaken holiday pay, and £300.00 in unpaid expenses.

Decision

Employment Judge Nash determined the claims on the papers under Rule 21 without a hearing, as the respondent had failed to respond. The tribunal accepted the claimants' case based on the ET1 and supporting documents, awarding each claimant the full amount claimed of £6,011.07, with the respondent ordered to account to HMRC for any tax and national insurance due.

Practical note

Where a respondent fails to file an ET3 response, Rule 21 enables the tribunal to enter default judgment on the papers without a hearing, accepting the claimant's case as proven based on the claim form and supporting documentation.

Award breakdown

Holiday pay£1,676
Unpaid wages£4,035

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 rule 21

Case details

Case number
2219978/2024
Decision date
20 September 2024
Hearing type
rule 21
Hearing days
Classification
default

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No