Case 1805161/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs T Rowlett v Gary Ata t/a Noble Design and Build — 2021
- Case reference
- 1805161/2020
- Decision date
- 6 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McAvoy Newns
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs T Rowlett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing was conducted remotely by CVP on 4 August 2021 before Employment Judge McAvoy Newns at Leeds Employment Tribunal. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Miss Ata, a lay representative.
The tribunal held that the claimant’s claim for automatically unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. The judgment does not set out further reasoning in the extracted text, but the dismissal is recorded as the tribunal’s finding on that claim.
The claimant succeeded on three money claims. The tribunal found the claim for unpaid notice pay well-founded and ordered the respondent to pay £327. It also found the claim for unpaid holiday pay well-founded and ordered payment of £392.40, and found the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded and ordered payment of £205.80.
The tribunal stated that these were gross sums and that the claimant was responsible for any income tax and/or national insurance contributions due on them. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment is £925.20.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records a claim for automatically unfair dismissal, which was dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Unpaid notice pay was found well-founded and succeeded. | Upheld | — | £327 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday pay was found well-founded and succeeded. | Upheld | — | £392 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for unauthorised deductions from wages was found well-founded and succeeded. | Upheld | — | £206 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £925
- across all upheld claims
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.