Case 1401074/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Wiblin-Meakin v Chaddlewood Farm Community Association — 2024
- Case reference
- 1401074/2023
- Decision date
- 4 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Scott Representation
- Venue
- Plymouth
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Wiblin-Meakin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs L Wiblin-Meakin had worked for Chaddlewood Farm Community Association since August 1996, mainly as Company Secretary and Administrator for 16 hours a week. She had been unfit for work since 1 September 2019 and was receiving chemotherapy for inoperable cancer. The parties agreed that the holiday year ran from 1 April to 31 March, that she remained employed, and that she had accrued 16 weeks' leave across the 2020/21 to 2023/24 leave years, worth £3,842.06 at the agreed annual figure of £960.51. The tribunal accepted that emails sent on 10 May 2022 and 11 August 2022 about holiday pay were sent, but found the respondent did not receive them.
Applying section 13 ERA 1996 and the Working Time Regulations 1998, the tribunal rejected the respondent's argument that earlier leave had expired because no request had been made during sickness absence. It held that, because the claimant was on sick leave, leave from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021 could be carried forward for 18 months under regulation 13(15), and that the respondent had failed to give her a reasonable opportunity to take leave, encourage her to do so, or notify her that untaken leave would be lost, so regulation 13(17) also applied. The tribunal referred to NHS Leeds v Mrs Janet Larner [2012] EWCA Civ 1034 in relation to sick-leave carry-over, but noted that after the UK's withdrawal from the EU workers in the UK can no longer rely on the Working Time Directive 2003/88/EC.
The claim for holiday pay / unlawful deductions from wages was dismissed because the claimant had not given notice of the dates she wished to take leave, so the tribunal found there had been no unlawful deduction to date. It said that if she wishes to be paid for the accrued holiday she should give notice of the 16-week period she now wants to take, and the respondent should confirm how she should request holiday going forward. The separate redundancy payment request was also rejected because her employment had not been terminated.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Holiday pay / unlawful deductions from wages claim. The tribunal accepted that 16 weeks' leave had accrued and was valued at £3,842.06, but held there had been no unlawful deduction because the claimant had not given notice of the dates she wished to take the leave. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Raised in the schedule of loss. The tribunal dismissed it because the claimant's employment had not been terminated. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA 1996
- s.23(4A) ERA 1996 two-year limit
- regulation 13 WTR 1998
- regulation 13(15)-(18) WTR 1998
- regulation 15 WTR 1998
- NHS Leeds v Mrs Janet Larner [2012] EWCA Civ 1034
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.