Case 2415814/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D White v Glendola Leisure Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2415814/2020
- Decision date
- 24 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Howard Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D White
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D White brought claims against Glendola Leisure Limited for breach of contract, unpaid accrued holiday, and unlawful deduction from wages. The judgment states that the claim for unpaid statutory and/or contractual notice of termination of employment was not well founded and was dismissed.
The tribunal also dismissed the claim for unpaid accrued holiday brought under Part XI of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and Regulations 13 to 16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The claim for unlawful deduction from wages under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was likewise found not well founded and dismissed.
The judgment does not record any monetary award, apportionment of remedy, or additional findings beyond dismissal of the claims.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was for unpaid statutory and/or contractual notice of termination of employment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment refers to unpaid accrued holiday under Part XI Employment Rights Act 1996 and Regulations 13-16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for unlawful deduction from wages was dismissed as not well founded. | 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.