Case 2500942/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Ward v Eshwinning Working Men’s Club Limited HELD AT: Newcastle (by video) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2500942/2024
- Decision date
- 22 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Ward
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 22 July 2024 before Employment Judge Aspden in Newcastle by video, the tribunal dealt with two monetary claims arising on termination of employment. The claimant appeared in person and there was no attendance for the respondent. The tribunal gave an oral judgment, later recorded in writing, and made no additional written reasons.
First, under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal determined that Mrs M Ward was entitled to a redundancy payment. The amount awarded was £5,599.80, which the respondent was ordered to pay as a redundancy payment.
Second, the tribunal found that the complaint that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from wages by failing to pay accrued untaken holiday on termination of employment was well founded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £993.72, being the amount due for that holiday pay claim. The judgment records no separate award of interest or other compensation beyond those two sums.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal determined under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,599.80. | Upheld | — | £5,600 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal held that the complaint concerning payment for accrued untaken holiday on termination was well founded and ordered payment of £993.72. | Upheld | — | £994 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,594
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.