Case 2200415/2022 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Mr A. Lloyd (company secretary) Interpreter: Ms A. Lee — 2022
- Case reference
- 2200415/2022
- Decision date
- 7 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Klimov
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a video hearing on 7 April 2022, before Employment Judge Klimov sitting alone, the tribunal determined the method to be used for the claimant’s furlough wages calculation. It held that her 'usual wages' for that purpose were to be calculated by reference to the higher of the wages earned in the corresponding calendar period in the previous year or the average wages payable in the 2019 to 2020 tax year.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was not on annual leave between July 2021 and October 2021, so her pay for that period had to be recalculated on that basis and in line with the furlough wages finding. It further found that, on the transfer of her contract of employment from Colonial World Food (UK) Ltd to the respondent, she had 3.5 weeks of accrued holiday.
On that footing, the tribunal directed that the claimant’s holiday pay be recalculated by reference to those findings. No final monetary figure was set in this judgment, and paragraph 5 records that if a remedy hearing is required, the parties must ask for the hearing to be listed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the claimant’s 'usual wages' for the furlough period had to be calculated using the higher of the wages earned in the corresponding calendar period in the previous year or the average wages payable in the 2019 to 2020 tax year. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the claimant was not on annual leave from July 2021 to October 2021, that she had 3.5 weeks of accrued holiday on transfer from Colonial World Food (UK) Ltd, and that her holiday pay had to be recalculated accordingly. | 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.