Case 2406220/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Villalba Real v Tru Street Food Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2406220/2019
- Decision date
- 24 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ross REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Villalba Real
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr S Villalba Real's case against Tru Street Food Limited was heard in Manchester on 11 February 2020 before Employment Judge Ross. The respondent did not attend. The tribunal found that the claimant was owed accrued but unpaid holiday on termination of employment and held that the holiday pay claim succeeded.
The tribunal awarded eight hours' holiday at £8.20 per hour, made up of £7.70 National Minimum Wage plus 50 pence share of gratuities, which came to £65.60. It then found that the respondent had failed to follow the ACAS Code of Practice when the claimant lodged a grievance about failure to pay holiday pay, and uplifted that amount by 20%, adding £13.12.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to provide written particulars of employment and awarded two weeks' pay of £328, calculated as £8.20 x 20 hours = £164 x 2. The judgment stated that the grand total owed was £406.72, payable within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Accrued but unpaid holiday on termination of employment; award of eight hours at £8.20 per hour. | Upheld | — | £66 |
| Other | 20% uplift for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice in relation to the grievance about holiday pay; treated as a remedy uplift rather than a separate substantive claim. | Upheld | — | £13 |
| Other | Failure to provide written particulars of employment; award of two weeks' pay. | Upheld | — | £328 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £407
- 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.