Case 1801216/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Martin-Long v Bebabo Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1801216/2017
- Decision date
- 5 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R Martin-Long
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs R Martin-Long brought claims against Bebabo Ltd for constructive unfair dismissal, unauthorized deductions from wages in respect of training costs, and unpaid accrued holiday pay. Employment Judge Eeley, sitting alone, heard the matter at Leeds and gave judgment on 5 February 2020.
The tribunal upheld the constructive unfair dismissal claim. It also upheld the claim for unpaid accrued holiday pay. The claim for unauthorized deductions from wages in respect of training costs failed and was dismissed.
The respondent was ordered to pay a total of £1,938. The judgment states that this comprised £34.87 holiday pay, £500 for loss of statutory rights, and a basic award of £1,403.13.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment records that the Claimant's constructive unfair dismissal claim succeeded. The stated award includes a basic award of £1,403.13, together with £500 for loss of statutory rights and £34.87 holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £1,403 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was pleaded as unauthorized deductions from wages in respect of training costs and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for unpaid accrued holiday pay succeeded. The judgment lists £34.87 as holiday pay within the overall award. | Upheld | — | £35 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,938
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,403
- statutory, unfair dismissal
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.