Case 2203477/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss D Williams v Bespoke Leisure Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2203477/2019
- Decision date
- 2 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicklin Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss D Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a remote CVP hearing on 2 December 2021 before Employment Judge Nicklin, with the claimant appearing in person and no attendance for the respondent, the tribunal made a short oral judgment. The written record states that reasons had been given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Miss D Williams was awarded a redundancy payment of £344.82, calculated from weekly pay of £114.94 multiplied by three. She was also awarded statutory notice pay of £344.82, calculated from weekly pay multiplied by four, and outstanding contractual holiday pay for four days at £57.89 per day, totalling £231.56.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay wages on time in June 2019, in breach of contract, and that this caused bank charges of £10. The total sum ordered was £931.20, subject to any applicable deductions for tax and/or National Insurance in respect of the notice pay and holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Redundancy payment awarded at £114.94 weekly pay x 3. | Upheld | — | £345 |
| Other | Statutory notice pay awarded at £114.94 weekly pay x 4; the judgment does not further label this claim. | Upheld | — | £345 |
| Holiday pay | Outstanding contractual holiday pay for 4 days at £57.89 per day. | Upheld | — | £232 |
| Breach of contract | Compensation for bank charges incurred because wages were paid late in June 2019. | Upheld | — | £10 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £931
- 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.