Case 2413660/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Russell v Unipart Group — 2024
- Case reference
- 2413660/2023
- Decision date
- 13 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne Representatives
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Russell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Liverpool (CVP) on 29 May 2024, Employment Judge Horne found that the respondent had refused to permit Mr M Russell to exercise his right to four weeks' annual leave under regulation 13 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 in the leave year 1 January to 31 December 2023. The tribunal recorded that he was only permitted to take three weeks of that leave, with the consequence that he was unable to take one week of regulation 13 leave in that leave year.
The judgment records that Mr Russell was accordingly entitled to carry forward one week of untaken leave into the following leave year, provided that the leave is taken by 30 June 2025. No monetary award is recorded in the written judgment; the outcome was a right to carry the leave forward rather than a cash remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | The tribunal found that the respondent refused to permit the claimant to take four weeks' annual leave under regulation 13 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 in the 1 January to 31 December 2023 leave year, allowing him only three weeks. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.