Case 2410094/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Myers v Lakeland Inns Group Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2410094/2022
- Decision date
- 13 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Myers
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which Employment Judge Johnson ordered payment without any separate findings narrative beyond the formal orders. The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and awarded the net sum of £3,220.02.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £861.56. The judgment records that this figure was calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant would have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay.
Finally, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's accrued but untaken annual leave entitlement of 4.5 days and awarded £553.86 gross. The total sum ordered payable to the claimant was £4,635.44 gross.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay accrued but untaken annual leave entitlement of 4.5 days and awarded £553.86 gross. | Upheld | — | £554 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £3,220.02. | Upheld | — | £3,220 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £861.56, calculated using gross pay to reflect likely tax treatment as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £862 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,635
- 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.