Case 2400616/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Dennehy v Alexander Clifford and Company Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2400616/2021
- Decision date
- 4 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ganner
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Dennehy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a short judgment in which the parties reached agreement by consent. Employment Judge Ganner, sitting alone, recorded that Alexander Clifford and Company Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Miss C Dennehy’s wages and ordered payment of £1,153.86 gross.
The tribunal also recorded, again by consent, that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement for untaken holiday on termination of employment. The respondent was ordered to pay £384.62 gross in respect of that claim.
A further agreed finding was that the respondent had been in breach of contract by failing to pay notice pay. Damages of £296.16 net of tax were ordered. The judgment states that the total payable by the respondent was £1,834.64. Written reasons were not provided because the judgment was given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | By consent, the respondent was found to have made an unauthorised deduction from wages and was ordered to pay the gross sum of £1,153.86. | Upheld | — | £1,154 |
| Holiday pay | By consent, the respondent was found to have failed to pay holiday entitlement for untaken holiday on termination of employment and was ordered to pay the gross sum of £384.62. | Upheld | — | £385 |
| Breach of contract | By consent, the respondent was found to be in breach of contract for failing to pay notice pay and was ordered to pay damages of £296.16 net of tax. | Upheld | — | £296 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,835
- 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.