Case 1400125/2023 · Employment Tribunal
- MR H ROBSON FOR THE v Sol Attendance Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1400125/2023
- Decision date
- 29 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cadney Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
- MR H ROBSON FOR THE
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimant was an employee of Environmental Treatment Concepts Ltd within the meaning of s230 Employment Rights Act 1996 from 4 November 2010 until 31 October 2022.
The judgment states that the claimant's claims were well founded and ordered the respondent to pay specified sums for redundancy pay, notice pay, unpaid pension, accrued but unpaid holiday pay, and accrued but unpaid salary. The judgment records a total of £27,244.03, although the listed individual sums include a holiday pay figure that is not reflected in that total.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes this as Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £4,941 |
| Redundancy | The judgment describes this as Redundancy Pay. | Upheld | — | £7,412 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as Unpaid Pension; classification is inferred from the wage-related monetary claim. | Upheld | — | £4,092 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment describes this as Accrued but unpaid holiday pay. The stated overall total does not include this amount, although it is listed among sums ordered. | Upheld | — | £4,832 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as Accrued but unpaid salary. | Upheld | — | £10,799 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £27,244
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s230 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.