Case 1602356/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Davies v Herald News (UK) Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1602356/2019
- Decision date
- 9 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moore Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Davies
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not submit an ET3 response form. Employment Judge Moore said there was sufficient material before the tribunal to determine the case and, acting under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, upheld Miss K Davies's claims for unpaid wages of £484.83 gross, unpaid holiday pay of £279.30 gross, and unpaid notice pay of £229.20.
The total award was £993.33. The judgment records that the claimant is responsible for any income tax and employee national insurance contributions due on the sums awarded for unpaid wages and unpaid holiday pay. The judgment was dated 3 April 2020 and sent to the parties on 9 April 2020.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded as unpaid wages gross; the judgment does not give a more specific statutory label. | Upheld | — | £485 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded as unpaid holiday pay gross; the judgment does not give a more specific statutory label. | Upheld | — | £279 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as unpaid notice pay. | Upheld | — | £229 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £993
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.