Case 2410254/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Pickett v Lux & Lux Care Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2410254/2022
- Decision date
- 21 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dennehy Case
- Venue
- Manchester via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Pickett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Dennehy Case, sitting in Manchester via CVP, recorded that the respondent did not attend. The tribunal upheld Ms J Pickett's holiday pay complaint, finding that Lux & Lux Care Limited failed to pay holiday pay in accordance with regulations 14(2) and 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 for three weeks and three days during August and September 2022. It ordered £2,964 gross, made up of £2,280 for three weeks at £760 per week and £684 for three days at £228 per day.
The tribunal also upheld the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction for one full day on 12 August 2022 while the claimant attended a mandatory training course, and ordered £228 gross.
In addition, the tribunal ordered £104 net to compensate the claimant for expenses incurred on behalf of the respondent. It further found that the respondent failed to provide a written statement of the main terms of employment complying with section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and increased the award under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 by £1,520, being two weeks' gross pay. The written record also stated that the tribunal calculated the award on a gross basis, subject to any lawful deductions for tax and national insurance before payment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal held the complaint of holiday pay well founded under regulations 14(2) and 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 for three weeks and three days during August and September 2022. The award was £2,964 gross, made up of £2,280 for three weeks at £760 per week and £684 for three days at £228 per day. | Upheld | — | £2,964 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from pay under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 in respect of one full day on 12 August 2022, when the claimant attended a mandatory training course. The respondent was ordered to pay £228 gross. | Upheld | — | £228 |
| Other | The tribunal found that the respondent failed in its duty to provide a written statement of the main terms of employment complying with section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, the award was increased by £1,520, described as two weeks' gross pay. | Upheld | — | £1,520 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,816
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- regulation 14(2) and 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998
- Part II Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- 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.