Case 2217695/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Ms. E Farley Ms. Y Sunderland v Reed Staffing Services Ltd. Hearing: Final Hearing — 2024

Case reference: 2217695/2023
Decision date: 30 September 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Tinnion Appearances

Indexed: 17 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms. E Farley Ms. Y Sunderland

Respondent

Reed Staffing Services Ltd. Hearing: Final Hearing

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Claimants, Ms Farley and Ms Sunderland, were temporary workers placed by Reed Staffing Services Ltd (RSS), a labour supply agency, in the education sector. They brought holiday pay claims under s.13 ERA 1996 and Reg 30(1) WTR 1998, disputing the calculation of rolled-up holiday pay in light of Harpur Trust v Brazel [2022] UKSC 21. The central question was whether non-working periods between assignments had to be included in the holiday pay calculation. The Claimants worked under a Contract of Service until 1 January 2023 and a Contract for Services from 2 January 2023.

The Tribunal held that clause 3 of the Contract for Services was valid: it provided a framework for successive ad hoc contracts, and between assignments from 2 January 2023 there was no contractual relationship between RSS and the Claimants, with no obligation to provide or accept work. Applying Carmichael v National Power plc [1991] 1 WLR 2024, the Tribunal found that the Claimants were free to work for other agencies during such periods and did so. Accordingly, the holiday pay claims for the period beginning 2 January 2023 were not well founded and were dismissed.

On jurisdiction, the Tribunal found that the deductions before and from 2 January 2023 formed one continuous series. However, because the later (in-time) claims failed on the merits, the earlier deductions (up to 1 January 2023) could not be brought in as part of an in-time series and were therefore out of time, depriving the Tribunal of jurisdiction. The question of interest under Issue #14 did not arise; the Tribunal observed obiter that it would not have awarded interest in any event, citing Connor v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [2023] EAT 42.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Holiday pay	Holiday pay claims based on statutory entitlements under the Working Time Regulations 1998 for periods beginning from 2 January 2023 were dismissed as not well founded; the Tribunal held that clause 3 of the Contract for Services was valid and effective.	Dismissed	—	—
Holiday pay	Holiday pay claims for periods ending on 1 January 2023 were dismissed as presented out of time; the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the later deductions (from 2 January 2023) failed, breaking the 'series of deductions' chain under s.23 ERA 1996 / Reg 30(2) WTR 1998.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

11 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.