Case 1802394/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S K McPhail Mr SBJ McPhail v Mr Robert Gerrard Hilliard — 2024
- Case reference
- 1802394/2024
- Decision date
- 21 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cox
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S K McPhail Mr SBJ McPhail
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimants, Mrs S K McPhail and Mr SBJ McPhail, submitted a single claim form on 16 April 2024 after early conciliation. They ticked claims for notice pay, holiday pay, arrears of pay and other payments, and the claim form also referred to alleged deductions for tax and national insurance and to a payslip issue. The respondent did not present a response, and the case was listed so the claimants could provide enough information for the tribunal to decide the claims.
The claimants said on 15 October 2024 that they could not attend the video hearing, and Employment Judge Cox had already refused a postponement on 14 October 2024 and emphasised the importance of attendance. When the hearing started on 21 October 2024, no party attended. The tribunal said it did not have sufficient information to decide the claims and could not uphold them on the limited material before it.
Applying rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, the tribunal dismissed the claims. It also said that, if the allegations were true, the respondent may have acted illegally and deprived the claimants of future benefits, but that was a matter for HMRC or another agency rather than the tribunal. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The notice pay claim was dismissed. The tribunal said it did not have enough information to decide the claim and could not uphold it on the limited material before it, particularly because the claimants did not attend the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay claim was dismissed for lack of sufficient information. The tribunal proceeded in the claimants' absence and was unable to decide the claim on the papers and the limited evidence available. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The arrears of pay and other payments claim was dismissed. The judgment noted the claimants' allegations about deductions from wages, but the tribunal could not determine the claim without the claimants' attendance and fuller information. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claim that the respondent failed to provide itemised pay statements was dismissed. The tribunal treated the matter as a payslip or written pay statement issue and dismissed it under rule 47 because there was insufficient information and no attendance. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 47 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.