Case 1800469/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Cousins First v Leisure Technique Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1800469/2021
- Decision date
- 23 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tegerdine Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Cousins First
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Leeds by CVP before Employment Judge Tegerdine, heard the case on 20 July 2021 and gave oral reasons at the hearing. In its written judgment, it found that the respondent did not unfairly dismiss Mr S Cousins, so the unfair dismissal complaint failed.
The tribunal also rejected the claimant's unauthorised deduction from wages claim relating to the respondent's sickness absence fund, finding that complaint was not well founded. However, it upheld the separate unauthorised deduction from wages claim relating to holiday pay, finding that the claimant had been underpaid in respect of 11 days' holiday.
No remedy figure was decided in this record. The tribunal stated that the remedy for the unauthorised deduction from wages finding would be determined at a further hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the respondent did not unfairly dismiss the claimant, so the complaint failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of the respondent's sickness absence fund was found not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of underpayments of holiday pay succeeded; the tribunal found the claimant was underpaid in respect of 11 days' holiday. Remedy was left to a further hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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.