Case 2501857/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Sandra Stephenson v Permoid Industries Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2501857/2021
- Decision date
- 14 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Sandra Stephenson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningSandra Stephenson’s employment ended on 6 August 2021. She brought a claim on 6 December 2021 under regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 for accrued but untaken holiday pay. The respondent did not file a response, so the tribunal proceeded under rule 21 on the available material.
The tribunal accepted that, by the date of termination, the claimant had accrued holiday entitlement during the holiday year beginning on 1 January 2021, and that she had been on sick leave and unable to take most of that leave. It found that at termination she had 91 hours of accrued but untaken annual leave remaining.
The tribunal held that the respondent failed to pay any of the outstanding annual leave on termination, in breach of regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. It therefore entered judgment for the claimant in the gross amount of £810.81, based on her hourly rate of £8.91.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Rule 21 judgment under the Working Time Regulations 1998. The tribunal found the complaint about accrued but untaken holiday pay well founded and awarded the gross sum of £810.81. | Upheld | — | £811 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £811
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- regulation 30 Working Time Regulations 1998
- regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 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.