Case 1401463/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Hawke-Davies v Mr Jovan Gajic — 2022
- Case reference
- 1401463/2022
- Decision date
- 18 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Danvers Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Hawke-Davies
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a video hearing on 9 November 2022 before Employment Judge Danvers, the tribunal amended the respondent’s name to Mr Jovan Gajic. It upheld the claimant’s holiday pay claim and awarded the amount owing under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 for holiday outstanding on termination.
The tribunal set out the holiday calculation by identifying 1.857 weeks of leave outstanding, using a week’s pay of £179.55 based on 19.95 average weekly normal working hours at £9 per hour, and deducting £117 already paid by the respondent on termination. The written decision initially states £216.43, but the corrected arithmetic in the judgment records a total of £216.42 gross for the holiday pay element.
The tribunal also found that when the proceedings were begun the respondent was in breach of the duty to provide a written statement of particulars under s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996. Under s.38 Employment Rights Act 1996, the claimant’s compensation was increased by two weeks’ pay, calculated at £359.10.
The written judgment records a Rule 69 correction to the oral decision because the original oral calculation had omitted the multiplication step before deducting the £117 already paid. The tribunal’s final figure was £575.52, subject to any necessary deductions for tax and national insurance.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Awarded under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 for untaken holiday on termination. The written judgment first states £216.43, but the Rule 69 correction and final total use £216.42. | Upheld | — | £216 |
| Other | The tribunal found that, when proceedings began, the respondent was in breach of the duty to provide a written statement of particulars under s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996, and increased compensation under s.38 by two weeks' pay. | Upheld | — | £359 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £576
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
5 references- regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998
- s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.38 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.221-224 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Rule 69 Employment Tribunal Rules 2013
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.