Case 1804301/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Olsen v Assist Healthcare Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1804301/2019
- Decision date
- 19 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Olsen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Sheffield on 5 December 2019 before Employment Judge T R Smith sitting alone. The respondent, Assist Healthcare Ltd, did not attend. The written judgment records that the claimant was Mrs A Johnson and that the tribunal dealt with complaints of unlawful deduction from wages and constructive unfair dismissal.
The tribunal upheld the claim for unlawful deduction from wages for non-payment of holiday pay and awarded £487.41. It also upheld a separate unlawful deduction from wages claim for arrears of pay and awarded £20.34.
The tribunal further held that the claimant had been constructively unfairly dismissed. On that claim it awarded £1,418, made up of a basic award of £918 and £500 compensatory award for loss of statutory rights. The judgment states that the Recoupment Regulations did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found this complaint well-founded in respect of non-payment of holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £487 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found this complaint well-founded in respect of arrears of pay. | Upheld | — | £20 |
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment stated that the complaint that the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed was well founded. The award comprised a basic award of £918 and £500 for loss of statutory rights. | Upheld | — | £1,418 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,418
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £918
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £500
- 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.