Case 2402184/2024 · Employment Tribunal
N Froud v V7 London Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2402184/2024
- Decision date
- 28 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
N Froud
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. It found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's accrued but untaken annual leave entitlement on termination of employment, and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £902.
The Tribunal further found that the respondent was in breach of its obligation to provide the claimant with a statutory statement of particulars of employment at the time the claim was presented. Under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, it made an additional award of four weeks' pay amounting to £1,700.
The respondent was accordingly ordered to pay the claimant the total sum of £2,602.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Respondent failed to pay accrued but untaken annual leave entitlement on termination; ordered to pay gross sum of £902. | Upheld | — | £902 |
| Other | Additional award of four weeks' pay under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 for breach of obligation to provide a statutory statement of particulars of employment at the time the claim was presented. | Upheld | — | £1,700 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,602
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.