Case 1801493/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Freda Moulds Respondent The Trustees of Whirlow Hall farm Trust (a registered Charity) v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801493/2023
- Decision date
- 26 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms Freda Moulds Respondent The Trustees of Whirlow Hall farm Trust (a registered Charity)
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Ms Freda Moulds, was employed from 3 November 2021 as cafe manager. Her contract included clause 11.5, which provided that unused holiday could not be carried forward, and clause 22, an entire-agreement clause. The issues before the tribunal were whether five days taken off in April 2022 had wrongly been treated as TOIL, and whether there was an oral agreement allowing unused holiday to be carried over so that payment would be due on termination of employment on 21 December 2022.
On the April 2022 five-day issue, the tribunal found that the claimant had received her April 2022 payslip and was fixed with constructive knowledge of its contents. It held that she did not complain until proceedings were issued on 16 March 2023, well outside the three-month time limit. The tribunal was not satisfied that it had not been reasonably practicable for her to bring the claim in time, so that head failed as out of time.
On the carry-over issue, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had asked Ms Hill-Wickham on several occasions from spring 2022 onwards whether holiday could be carried forward, but it preferred Ms Hill-Wickham's evidence that permission was not given and that Mr Davies declined the request. The tribunal found that no oral agreement was established. It also found that there was no written recording of any variation to the contract, and that an oral understanding could not displace the express written no-carry-over term in clause 11.5. The claim was dismissed in full.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal treated the April 2022 five-day TOIL dispute as an unlawful deduction claim under s.13 ERA 1996 and the Working Time Regulations. It held the claim was out of time because the claimant had constructive knowledge from her April 2022 payslip and did not show that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim within three months. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal dismissed the claim for payment of carried-over holiday on termination because it preferred Ms Hill-Wickham's evidence that no oral agreement to permit carry-over had been made, and there was no written variation of clause 11.5 of the contract. It also held that any oral understanding would not have displaced the express written term. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.23(2) ERA 1996
- s.23(4) ERA 1996
- Regulation 16 WTR 1998
- Regulation 30 WTR 1998
- Deduction from Wages (Limitation) Regulations 2014
- common law variation of an express written contract
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.