Case 1306817/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A James v Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy — 2020
- Case reference
- 1306817/2019
- Decision date
- 25 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A James
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant attended in person and gave evidence. The respondent did not attend, but the tribunal considered the Secretary of State's response and additional documentation.
The tribunal made a declaration under section 188 of the Employment Rights Act that the payment made to the claimant under section 182 of the Act was less than the amount which should have been paid. It declared that the claimant was entitled to £103.45 gross for one day's holiday under Regulation 30(1)(b) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and £782.51 gross in arrears of pay.
Because the claimant had already received £370.16 gross under section 182 of the Employment Rights Act, the tribunal found he was entitled to a further £515.80, subject to appropriate deductions for tax and national insurance.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The judgment declared entitlement to £103.45 gross for one day's holiday under Regulation 30(1)(b) of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The final further payment was calculated after crediting a prior aggregate payment and was not split between heads of claim. | Upheld | — | £103 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment declared entitlement to £782.51 gross in arrears of pay. The final further payment was calculated after crediting a prior aggregate payment and was not split between heads of claim. | Upheld | — | £783 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £516
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s188 Employment Rights Act
- s182 Employment Rights Act
- Regulation 30(1)(b) Working Time Regulations 1998
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.