Case 1601492/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Young v Mr M Raza (t/a Barnums Dry Cleaners) Heard: by video — 2021
- Case reference
- 1601492/2019
- Decision date
- 14 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Young
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting by video on 6 September 2021 before Employment Judge S Jenkins, rejected the claimant’s claims of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and redundancy payment. It found that she was not unfairly dismissed, not wrongfully dismissed, and not dismissed by reason of redundancy, so those claims failed.
The tribunal also rejected the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages. It held that the claim had been brought outside the stipulated time limit and that it was reasonably practicable for it to have been brought in time, so that claim failed.
The only successful claim was for accrued but untaken holiday. The tribunal found that the claimant had not been paid in respect of that holiday and ordered the respondent, Mr M Raza trading as Barnums Dry Cleaners, to pay the gross sum of £131.36.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was not unfairly dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was not wrongfully dismissed and treated this as a failed breach of contract claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was not dismissed by reason of redundancy, so the redundancy payment claim failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim was brought outside the stipulated time limit and that it was reasonably practicable for it to have been brought in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant had not been paid in respect of accrued but untaken holiday and ordered the respondent to pay £131.36 gross. | Upheld | — | £131 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £131
- 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.