Case 2401628/2021 · Employment Tribunal
No attendance For the v Mr P Pickthall – Consultant (retired) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2401628/2021
- Decision date
- 28 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No attendance For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant did not attend the hearing and gave no application for an adjournment or explanation for his absence. The tribunal proceeded under Rule 47, took account of the claim form and the material on file, and heard evidence from Barbara Holmes for the respondent.
The only live issue addressed in the judgment was the claimant's unpaid holiday pay claim, limited to 6 days in December 2020. The claimant said those days had been required during his notice period in contravention of Regulation 15 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The tribunal accepted the respondent's evidence that the claimant's contract of employment, signed on 9 April 2019, contained a provision allowing the respondent to direct holiday during the notice period.
The tribunal was satisfied that the respondent exercised that contractual right in a letter dated 14 December 2020 and that the claimant was paid for the six days at his full rate of pay, notwithstanding that he was on furlough at the time. Referring to Regulation 15(5) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and the Employment Rights Act 1996 (Coronavirus, Calculation of a Week's Pay) Regulations 2020, the tribunal concluded that the requirement to take holiday was correct.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the holiday pay claim was not well-founded and dismissed it. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The claimant withdrew any holiday pay claim except for 6 days in December 2020, which he said the respondent required him to take during his notice period in breach of Regulation 15 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The tribunal found the employment contract, signed on 9 April 2019, allowed the respondent to direct holiday in the notice period, that the respondent did so in a letter dated 14 December 2020, and that the claimant was paid for the six days at his full rate of pay while on furlough. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 47
- Regulation 15(5) Working Time Regulations 1998
- Employment Rights Act 1996 (Coronavirus, Calculation of a Week's Pay) Regulations 2020
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.