Case 1303330/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R Savage v The White Rooms Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1303330/2018
- Decision date
- 2 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge The
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R Savage
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The respondent stated in its Response that it was not contesting any part of the claim, so the Employment Judge determined the case on the available information before the tribunal.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's breach of contract claim in respect of notice pay and awarded damages of £307.50 net. It also declared that the respondent had made an unauthorized deduction from the claimant's pay and awarded £200 net for that claim.
In addition, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay holiday pay in accordance with the Working Time Regulations 1998 and ordered payment of £307.50 net. The hearing listed for 2 April 2019 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay; judgment entered under Rule 21 because the respondent stated that it was not contesting any part of the claim. | Upheld | — | £308 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal declared that the respondent made an unauthorized deduction from the claimant's pay; judgment entered under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | £200 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay holiday pay in accordance with the Working Time Regulations 1998; judgment entered under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | £308 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £815
- across all upheld claims
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.