Case 2410430/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Savage v Joe Davies (Manchester) Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2410430/2019
- Decision date
- 6 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ross REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Savage
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Manchester, sitting by CVP before Employment Judge Ross on 21 October 2020, recorded that the claimant, Miss A Savage, had brought a claim for unfair dismissal and a separate claim for a payment in lieu of accrued but untaken holidays on termination of employment. The judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The unfair dismissal claim was found not well-founded and failed. No further written reasoning is set out in the record supplied, so the judgment does not provide additional detail on the factual or legal basis for that conclusion.
The holiday-related claim was dismissed because the sum owed had by then been paid by the respondent. The judgment does not record any monetary award, and the written decision shows no remaining remedy to be paid.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claim was not well-founded and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for a payment in lieu of accrued but untaken holidays on termination was dismissed because the sum owed had by then been paid by the respondent. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.