Vol. I·6 May 2026

Search the index

Loading…

Loading page content.

Tribunal Watch

A structured, cross-cut index of UK employment tribunal decisions, built from the primary record at gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions. Independent of HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice.

Not legal advice. Information on this site is a matter of public record; it is not guidance on any individual case.

Editorial

About this site
Methodology
Corrections policy
Editorial standards

Rights & privacy

Open Government Licence v3.0
Privacy notice
Data subject requests
Atom feed (recent decisions)

Mr N Booth First v A-Day Consultants Limited t/a Academics Second Respondent: Leading Learners Multi-Academy Trust Date: 7 February 2024 — Employment Tribunal 2024 | Tribunal Watch

Tribunal Watch/A-Day Consultants Limited t/a Academics Second Respondent: Leading Learners Multi-Academy Trust Date: 7 February 2024/1805287/2023

Case 1805287/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr N Booth First v A-Day Consultants Limited t/a Academics Second Respondent: Leading Learners Multi-Academy Trust Date: 7 February 2024 — 2024

Case reference: 1805287/2023
Decision date: 9 February 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Shepherd Members

Indexed: 26 April 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr N Booth First

Respondent

A-Day Consultants Limited t/a Academics Second Respondent: Leading Learners Multi-Academy Trust Date: 7 February 2024

Claims brought

2 categories

Agency worker regulations
Unlawful deduction from wages

Source tags (gov.uk)

Agency Workers and Unlawful Deduction from Wages

Outcomes per claim are extracted in a second pass and are not yet published on this page.

Source document

Primary record

The full judgment is available on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Judgment 1 (PDF) ↗

Judgment 2 (PDF) ↗

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.