Case 2303376/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Derek Brand v Kite Glass Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303376/2022
- Decision date
- 13 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Krepski Representation
- Venue
- London South via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Derek Brand
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningHeard at London South via CVP on 21 February 2023 before Employment Judge Krepski, the case concerned two wage-related complaints brought by Derek Brand against Kite Glass Limited. The tribunal found that the claimant’s complaint about holiday pay accrued but unpaid on termination was well founded.
The tribunal calculated holiday pay at £388.60 gross. It noted that £278.90 gross had already been paid, and ordered Kite Glass Limited to pay the remaining £109.70 gross to the claimant, subject to the usual deductions of tax and similar deductions.
The claimant’s separate complaint that there had been an unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of overtime was dismissed. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Complaint that holiday pay accrued but unpaid on termination had not been fully paid. The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to £388.60 gross, recorded that £278.90 gross had already been paid, and ordered the balance of £109.70 gross, subject to the usual deductions. | Upheld | — | £110 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint that there had been an unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of overtime was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £110
- 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.