Case 2302728/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Thomas Holland v Canterbury Taxis Limited Held at: London South (By CVP Video) — 2025
- Case reference
- 2302728/2025
- Decision date
- 14 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Siddall Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Thomas Holland
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims for statutory redundancy pay, unlawful deduction from wages, holiday pay, breach of contract (notice pay), and failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars against Canterbury Taxis Limited. The case was heard at London South by CVP video on 14 October 2025 before Employment Judge Siddall sitting alone.
The Tribunal found that the claimant was an employee and was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £962.60. It also found the respondent had failed to provide a written statement of particulars under s.1 ERA 1996 and awarded two weeks' pay (£962.60) under s.38 of the Employment Act 2002. The claims for unlawful deduction from wages, holiday pay, and breach of contract for notice pay were not well founded and were dismissed. The total award was £1,925.20.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £963 |
| Other | Failure to provide written statement of particulars of employment under s.1 ERA 1996; two weeks' pay awarded under s.38 Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £963 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unlawful deduction from wages claim not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim in relation to notice pay not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,925
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.