Case 1307704/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Bowell v Ms Patricia Serita (also known as Patricia Chipiro) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1307704/2019
- Decision date
- 24 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Flood
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Bowell
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Birmingham hearing on 24 February 2020, Employment Judge Flood sitting alone upheld the claimant Miss C Bowell’s complaints of unlawful deduction from wages for July 2019 and August 2019, and her complaint for accrued holiday pay, against the respondent Ms Patricia Serita, also known as Patricia Chipiro.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £508.11 for unpaid wages in July 2019. It also ordered payment of £880 for unpaid wages in August 2019, and £1,320 for 16.5 days of accrued but untaken holiday pay.
The judgment records that the sum payable for July 2019 was the net amount, while the sums for August 2019 and holiday pay were gross amounts for which the claimant was responsible for income tax and National Insurance contributions. Written reasons were not provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Accrued but untaken holiday pay for 16.5 days; paragraph 4 records that this sum was to be paid gross. | Upheld | — | £1,320 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid wages for July 2019; the tribunal ordered payment of the net sum of £508.11. | Upheld | — | £508 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid wages for August 2019; paragraph 4 records that this sum was to be paid gross. | Upheld | — | £880 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,708
- 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.