Case 1800189/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Sharples (GMB) For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 1800189/2023
- Decision date
- 2 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr N Sharples (GMB) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 2 May 2023 in Leeds by Teams before Employment Judge Davies, the tribunal recorded by consent that the claimant's breach of contract complaints in relation to holiday pay and notice pay were well-founded. It ordered the respondent to pay holiday pay of £2,656.14 and notice pay of £9,107.
The tribunal also found the claimant's breach of contract complaint concerning the failure to pay a contractual redundancy payment well-founded and ordered £22,373.20. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | By consent; breach of contract complaint in relation to holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £2,656 |
| Breach of contract | By consent; breach of contract complaint in relation to notice pay. | Upheld | — | £9,107 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract complaint in relation to failure to pay a contractual redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £22,373 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £34,136
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.