Case 1805619/2022 · Employment Tribunal
1. Mr D Holmes 2. Mr A Stainton 3. Miss K Wilson v H&H Equestrian Services Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1805619/2022
- Decision date
- 26 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Armstrong Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
1. Mr D Holmes 2. Mr A Stainton 3. Miss K Wilson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal amended the respondent’s name to H&H Equestrian Services Ltd for the first and third claimants, and confirmed that the second claimant’s claim proceeded as issued against that respondent. It allowed the first claimant’s application to set aside the striking out of his notice pay claim, but refused his application to set aside the striking out of his redundancy payment claim. It also allowed the second claimant’s application to amend his claim to include holiday pay, and the third claimant’s application to amend her claim to include notice pay.
For Mr D Holmes, the tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay contractual notice pay and awarded £950 gross. It also found unauthorised deductions from wages for the period 1 September to 13 October 2022 and awarded £2,071 gross. In addition, it found that he had accrued but untaken holiday pay on termination and awarded £497.85.
For Mr A Stainton, the tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay contractual notice pay and awarded £1,197 gross. It found unauthorised deductions from wages for the period 1 September to 11 October 2022 and awarded £2,047.25 gross. It also found that he had accrued but untaken holiday pay on termination and awarded £212.90.
For Miss K Wilson, the tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay contractual notice pay and awarded £1,197 gross. It found unauthorised deductions from wages for the period 1 September to 11 October 2022 and awarded £1,938 gross. It also found that she had accrued but untaken holiday pay on termination and awarded £496.85. The total of the awards recorded in the judgment is £10,607.85.
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | First claimant, Mr D Holmes; contractual notice pay. The tribunal allowed his application to set aside the striking out of this claim. | Upheld | — | £950 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | First claimant, Mr D Holmes; unauthorised deductions from wages for the period 1 September to 13 October 2022. | Upheld | — | £2,071 |
| Holiday pay | First claimant, Mr D Holmes; accrued but untaken holiday pay on termination. | Upheld | — | £498 |
| Breach of contract | Second claimant, Mr A Stainton; contractual notice pay. The tribunal allowed his application to amend the claim to include holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £1,197 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Second claimant, Mr A Stainton; unauthorised deductions from wages for the period 1 September to 11 October 2022. | Upheld | — | £2,047 |
| Holiday pay | Second claimant, Mr A Stainton; accrued but untaken holiday pay on termination. | Upheld | — | £213 |
| Breach of contract | Third claimant, Miss K Wilson; contractual notice pay. The tribunal allowed her application to amend the claim to include notice pay. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,608
- 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.