Case 2213541/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss E. Donegan v Beer & Young Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2213541/2023
- Decision date
- 22 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss E. Donegan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not attend the hearing or defend the claim. The tribunal therefore refused to postpone the hearing under rule 30A(2), refused an extension of time to present a defence because no compliant application had been made under rule 20, and proceeded to determine the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013.
The claimant's holiday pay claim succeeded. The tribunal ordered Beer & Young Ltd to pay £1,038.46 gross as the sum due.
The tribunal also found that the respondent was in breach of contract when it terminated the claimant's employment without written notice. It ordered damages of £2,500 gross for that breach. The total award was £3,538.46, subject to deduction of tax and any national insurance contributions due before payment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,038 |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,500 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,538
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 rule 21
- Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 rule 30A(2)
- Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2013 rule 20
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.