Case 2309310/2025 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mrs C Sweby, Owner — 2026
- Case reference
- 2309310/2025
- Decision date
- 19 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Morton Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed Ms M Fortis's claim for holiday pay. Employment Judge Morton held that the claimant had not shown that The Custom Cafe Limited owed her any holiday pay, and her claim for £420 therefore failed.
The tribunal also determined the respondent's counterclaim concerning wages. It found that the respondent had shown an overpayment of wages to the claimant in the sum of £1,200.72. The respondent accepted, however, that it owed the claimant £59.99 in unpaid tips.
The tribunal set the unpaid tips figure against the overpayment. Judgment was therefore entered for the respondent on its counterclaim in the net sum of £1,140.73, and the claimant was ordered to repay that sum forthwith. No separate written reasons were provided in the judgment record beyond the oral reasons given at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim for £420 in holiday pay, finding she had not shown that the respondent owed her any holiday pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The respondent accepted that it owed the claimant £59.99 in unpaid tips. That amount was set off against the respondent's successful counterclaim for overpaid wages. | Upheld | — | £60 |
| Other | The respondent's counterclaim for overpayment of wages succeeded. The tribunal found an overpayment of £1,200.72 and, after deducting £59.99 in unpaid tips owed to the claimant, gave judgment to the respondent for £1,140.73 payable forthwith. | Upheld | — | £1,141 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,141
- 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.