Case 1802681/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs N Yates v Carabuild Leisure Homes Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1802681/2020
- Decision date
- 12 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs N Yates
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs N Yates’ unfair dismissal claim succeeded. The tribunal found that she had been constructively dismissed and ordered Carabuild Leisure Homes Ltd to pay £9,123.03 in respect of that claim, made up of a basic award of £1,883 and a compensatory award of £7,240.03.
The judgment also recorded that the claimant had suffered unauthorised deductions from wages. In consequence, the respondent was ordered to pay £59.42 for arrears of wages and £77.22 for accrued but untaken holiday entitlement.
No separate breach of contract complaint was made by the claimant. The decision was given by Employment Judge Maidment at Leeds by CVP on 12 October 2020.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was constructively dismissed and that her unfair dismissal claim succeeded. | Upheld | — | £9,123 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered payment of £59.42 in respect of arrears of wages. | Upheld | — | £59 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal ordered payment of £77.22 in respect of accrued but untaken holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £77 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,260
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,883
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £7,240
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.