Case 2415712/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Williams v Counterline Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2415712/2020
- Decision date
- 9 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was absent from 18 March 2020 with coronavirus symptoms and received statutory sick pay for 23 to 27 March 2020. The tribunal found furlough payments were not claimed for that week, the claimant was not told he had been placed on furlough before 30 March, and a generic furlough letter sent on 15 April 2020 could not retrospectively change his contractual sick-leave entitlement. The complaint about deductions for that period was therefore not well-founded.
On holiday, the tribunal accepted the contract allowed the respondent to require the claimant to take outstanding leave without advance notice, varying the usual notice requirements under regulation 15 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. It held, however, that this only worked where it was possible for the claimant to take the leave in the period specified. The claimant had accrued 127.4 hours of leave to 30 June 2020, but the working time available between 12 and 30 June was only 100.1 hours, so the excess could not be required to be taken by 30 June and remained outstanding at termination.
After calculating the holiday pay due, the tribunal found that 27.3 hours had to be paid at 100% of normal pay and that the remaining holiday taken during furlough required a 20% top-up. It calculated £481.00 due in total against £410.43 already paid, leaving a gross shortfall of £70.57. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay that sum and noted that it had no jurisdiction in this claim to award compensation for distress or time spent bringing the case, although a preparation time order could be sought separately.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint about the period 23 to 27 March 2020. The tribunal found the claimant was on sick leave during that week, was entitled only to statutory sick pay under his contract, and had not been told he was on furlough before 30 March 2020. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Holiday pay complaint. The tribunal held the respondent could require accrued leave to be taken during furlough only to the extent it was possible to take it in the stated period. It calculated a gross shortfall of £70.57 after finding £481.00 due and £410.43 paid. | Upheld | — | £71 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £71
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- regulation 15 WTR 1998
- regulation 15(5) WTR 1998
- relevant agreement (regulation 2(1) WTR 1998)
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.