Case 2401713/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Rachel Carey v Intesa (Leicester) Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2401713/2022
- Decision date
- 29 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Rachel Carey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment because Intesa (Leicester) Ltd failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Phil Allen recorded that a determination could properly be made in accordance with rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On the material claim, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay Rachel Carey’s holiday entitlement. It therefore ordered the respondent to pay £2,038.71. The hearing listed for 1 November 2022 was cancelled.
The judgment was sent to the parties on 28 June 2022. An attached interest notice recorded the relevant decision day as 28 June 2022, the calculation day as 29 June 2022, and the stipulated interest rate as 8%, but the judgment text does not set out a separate quantified interest award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £2,038.71. | Upheld | — | £2,039 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,039
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.