Case 2400437/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Grieve Robson v AMR Leisure Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400437/2024
- Decision date
- 24 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Grieve Robson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Grieve Robson brought a claim against AMR Leisure Limited for accrued but untaken holidays on termination of employment. The hearing took place at Manchester by CVP on 10 June 2024 before Employment Judge K M Ross. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not attend.
The tribunal held that the holiday pay claim was well-founded and succeeded. It ordered the respondent to pay £4,250 gross within 14 days of the date of the judgment. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The award was calculated on the basis that the claimant normally worked 50 hours per week at £17 an hour, producing a gross weekly figure of £850. The tribunal divided that by five to reach a daily rate of £170, then multiplied £170 by 25 days to arrive at the award of £4,250 gross.
The notice accompanying the judgment records that interest would only become payable if the sum was not paid in full within 14 days after the written record was sent to the parties. It states the relevant decision day as 24 June 2024, the calculation day as 25 June 2024, and the stipulated rate of interest as 8% per annum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant's claim for accrued but untaken holidays on termination of employment well-founded and ordered payment of £4,250 gross within 14 days. The award was calculated on the basis that the claimant normally worked 50 hours per week at £17 an hour, giving £850 gross weekly and a daily rate of £170, multiplied by 25 days. | Upheld | — | £4,250 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,250
- 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.