Case 2500525/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P King v Lisa Bagnall and Kayleigh Bagnall trading as The Queens Head — 2021
- Case reference
- 2500525/2021
- Decision date
- 9 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Morris
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P King
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Morris, sitting alone at Newcastle Hearing Centre by CVP on 8 July 2021, found that Mr P King’s complaint under Regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 was well-founded. The complaint concerned the respondents’ failure to pay compensation in respect of holiday entitlement that had accrued but had not been taken by the termination of employment.
The tribunal ordered Lisa Bagnall and Kayleigh Bagnall, trading as The Queens Head, jointly and severally to pay £1,578.06. The judgment records that the award was calculated by reference to the claimant’s gross pay and that any income tax or employee’s national insurance liability arising from the award would be the claimant’s responsibility alone.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | Complaint under Regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 for payment in respect of accrued but untaken holiday at termination was upheld. | Upheld | — | £1,578 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,578
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,578
- compensatory remedy recorded
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.