Case 1805306/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Senior v What’s Running Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1805306/2023
- Decision date
- 13 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Senior
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Judge made a Rule 21 determination because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The name of the respondent was amended from Nicholas Chacksfield to What’s Running Ltd. The claim had been issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 19 October 2023.
The tribunal held that the claims for unauthorised deductions from wages and for holiday pay succeeded. The judgment did not set out a split of compensation between the claims, and it did not record any monetary award in this decision.
The judgment states that the compensation to which the claimant is entitled would be determined at the hearing listed for 14 December 2023. No further findings or legal tests were recorded in the text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment: the respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the claim succeeded. Compensation was to be determined at the hearing listed for 14 December 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Rule 21 judgment: the respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the claim succeeded. Compensation was to be determined at the hearing listed for 14 December 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.