Case 2500482/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Rachel Shell v The Vine & Olive Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500482/2023
- Decision date
- 31 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hallen
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Rachel Shell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 31 May 2023 at Newcastle Employment Tribunal, Employment Judge Hallen sat alone by CVP. The claimant, Ms Rachel Shell, appeared in person and the respondent neither attended nor was represented. The judgment records that the claimant had unlawful deductions made from her wages and also had unpaid holiday pay at the termination of her employment.
The tribunal awarded £1,113.18 gross in respect of unpaid wages and £300 gross in respect of unpaid holiday pay. The total award recorded in the judgment was £1,413.18. No further reasoning, legal test, or separate apportionment beyond those sums is set out in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claimant had unlawful deductions made from her wages and awards £1,113.18 gross in respect of unpaid wages. | Upheld | — | £1,113 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment also awards £300 gross in respect of unpaid holiday pay at the termination of employment. | Upheld | — | £300 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,413
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.