Case 1601714/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Stephen Ede v Accredilink Community Response Taskforce CYF — 2023
- Case reference
- 1601714/2023
- Decision date
- 13 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge N Webb Representation
- Venue
- ET Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Stephen Ede
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place at ET Cardiff by video on 10 November 2023 before Employment Judge N Webb. The respondent had notice of the hearing, had not presented a response to the claim, and did not attend or apply to participate after a rule 21 notice had been issued. The tribunal proceeded in the respondent's absence in the interests of justice.
The tribunal found that the respondent had not paid the claimant the full amount due for accrued holiday at the end of his contract. It recorded that the claimant was entitled to a total of £4,522.98 for accrued holiday, calculated as 42 days' leave at a daily rate of £107.69.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had already paid £1,250 gross in respect of outstanding holiday pay. It therefore ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the remaining balance of £3,272.98.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant had not been paid the full amount due for accrued holiday at the end of his contract. It recorded that the respondent had already paid £1,250 gross and ordered payment of the balance. | Upheld | — | £3,273 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,273
- 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.