Case 2202429/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 2202429/2019
- Decision date
- 20 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A James Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningFollowing oral evidence from the claimant and submissions from both sides, the tribunal upheld the claim for breach of contract in respect of notice pay. It ordered the respondent to pay £175.75, described as £270 for a 30-hour week at £9 per hour less one week's statutory sick pay of £94.25.
The tribunal also upheld the holiday pay claim under section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996 and Regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998. The annex set out calculations for 1 June 2018 to 7 October 2018, 8 October 2018 to 10 February 2019, and 11 February 2019 to 23 April 2019. It recorded holiday pay received for 25, 26 December 2018 and 1 January 2019, noted that this had not been taken into account in the figures given during the hearing, and concluded that total holiday pay due was £1,146.00.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim succeeded under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. | Upheld | — | £176 |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim succeeded under section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996 and Regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998. | Upheld | — | £1,146 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,322
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
- s.23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998
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.