Decision date
8 December 2025
Tribunal
Employment Tribunal
Jurisdiction
England & Wales
Judge
Employment Judge Leith
Case Summary
The Third Respondent made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages and failed to pay accrued annual leave. The claims of unfair dismissal and redundancy payment were dismissed.
Why this outcome?
No qualifying employment periodThe claim was partially successful because the Third Respondent made unauthorised wage deductions and failed to pay accrued annual leave, both of which were upheld. However, the unfair dismissal and redundancy claims were dismissed because the Claimant lacked the necessary qualifying period of service required by statute.
Claim Types
Key Issues
- •unauthorised deductions from wages
- •failure to pay accrued annual leave
- •unfair dismissal
- •redundancy payment
Decision Text
Case No: 2302762/2025 & 2302774/2025 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr C Watkins Respondents: Patrick O’Donnell (1) Simon Cox (2) Warwick Square Developments Limited (3) Heard at: Croydon (via CVP) On: 8 December 2025 Before: Employment Judge Leith Representation Claimant: In person Respondent: No attendance or representation JUDGMENT 1. The Third Respondent made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant’s wages in the period from 2 April 2024 and 28 July 2024. The Third Respondent must pay the Claimant the gross sum of £9,674.72, being the sum deducted. The Claimant is responsible for any income tax and national insurance due on the sum paid. 2. The Third Respondent failed to pay the Claimant in respect of annual leave accrued but untaken on termination of his employment. The Third Respondent must pay the Claimant the gross sum of £947.04, being the value of the accrued but untaken leave (calculated based on 10 days accrued at the point of termination, less two public holidays taken, leaving eight days at the Claimant’s daily date of £115.38 per day). The Claimant is responsible for any income tax and national insurance due on the sum paid. 3. The claims of unfair dismissal and redundancy payment are dismissed as the Claimant lacked the necessary qualifying service. 4. The claims against the First and Second Respondents are dismissed. Approved by: Employment Judge Leith Date: 8 th December 2025 Case No: 2302762/2025 & 2302774/2025 JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON Date: 11 th December 2025 FO…
Something doesn't look right?
Report a wrong claim type, outcome, summary, or award.
Case Details
- Claimant
- Mr C Watkins
- Case No.
- 2302762/2025
- Tribunal
- Employment Tribunal
- Level
- First instance
- Decision
- 8 December 2025
- Published
- 21 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith
- Representation
- Litigant in person