Case 2301644/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301644/2024
- Decision date
- 27 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Morton Date
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a claim about holiday pay under the claimant's contract and the Working Time Regulations. The tribunal found that the complaint was not, in substance, a refusal of holiday: the respondent did provide paid leave and there was no breach of regulations 13 or 13A WTR.
The tribunal accepted the claimant's interpretation of clause 10.3 of the contract and found that she was a part-time worker for this purpose. It rejected the respondent's case that she should be treated as full time and that the Care Planner system's calculations governed, holding that the contract entitled her to one hour of holiday pay for every 4.77 hours worked.
On the evidence, the tribunal accepted the claimant's page 36 calculation and found that at the date of claim she was owed 81.35 hours of holiday pay at £10.42 per hour, amounting to £847.67. After crediting 40 hours already paid between the claim and the hearing, the tribunal ordered payment of £430.49. It also held that further holiday pay accruing after the hearing must continue to be calculated under the contract, subject to credit for sums already paid, but did not make a specific monetary award for that later period because the precise figures were not clear.
The tribunal declined any preparation time order or ACAS uplift.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal rejected the complaint as a refusal-of-holiday claim and found no breach of regs 13 or 13A WTR, but upheld the contractual holiday pay claim under clause 10.3. It found the claimant was a part-time worker for this purpose and that the respondent's Care Planner calculation did not override the contract. | Upheld | — | £430 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £430
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- regs 13, 13A, 15A and 16 WTR 1998
- s.222 ERA 1996
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.