Case 1804586/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Ms J Nkusia and Mr S Briggs — 2023
- Case reference
- 1804586/2023
- Decision date
- 18 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge James Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Sheffield on 18 December 2023, the parties discussed the number of days' accrued but untaken holiday due on termination and the daily rate applying to those days. It was agreed that the claimant was entitled to 3.6 days' holiday at £102.25 per day, with the respondent to deduct the appropriate amounts for tax and national insurance. The claimant was expecting a net sum of £306.
The tribunal then entered judgment that the claim for unauthorised deduction of wages succeeded under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £368.10 less lawful deductions for tax and national insurance.
The claimant also confirmed that he did not intend to pursue any claim arising from the respondent's failure to provide a statement of particulars of employment. No declaration or compensation was therefore ordered in relation to that matter.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal recorded an agreed position that the claimant was entitled to 3.6 days' holiday at £102.25 per day, with the respondent to make lawful deductions for tax and national insurance. The formal judgment ordered payment of £368.10 less lawful deductions. | Upheld | — | £368 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £368
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.