Case 1306205/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Shepherd v Rac — 2019
- Case reference
- 1306205/2019
- Decision date
- 19 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Meichen Appearances
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Shepherd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not attend the hearing and had not presented a response or otherwise engaged with the tribunal’s correspondence. Employment Judge Meichen therefore proceeded under Rule 21 on the basis of the information provided by the claimant, both in correspondence and orally at the hearing, and was satisfied that there was sufficient information to determine the claim.
The tribunal amended the respondent’s name from “RAC” to the correct full name, RAC Group Ltd. It then found that the claimant’s claim for unpaid holiday pay succeeded.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £1,098.03 gross. The judgment records that the claimant is responsible for any tax or national insurance that may be payable on that sum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The claimant’s claim for unpaid holiday pay succeeded. The tribunal ordered payment of £1,098.03 gross, with the claimant responsible for any tax or national insurance payable. | Upheld | — | £1,098 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,098
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.