Case 2502358/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Major v Conduit Construction Network Ltd Heard: Remotely by way of Cloud Video Platform (‘CVP’) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2502358/2020
- Decision date
- 19 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Major
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr P Major brought a claim for unpaid holiday pay said to arise on termination of his employment on 20 September 2020. The tribunal recorded that he started work for Conduit Construction Network Ltd on 24 February 2020 on a 6-month contract, that he was later offered a permanent position, and that he left to take up other employment on 28 September 2020. The dispute was whether he was contractually entitled to 25 days plus 8 days holiday or 20 days plus 8 days holiday, and whether a 3-month probationary period or a longer period applied.
The claimant did not attend the hearing. The tribunal proceeded under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 after noting that he had not complied with directions, had not engaged with correspondence from the respondent, and had not asked for an adjournment. The tribunal found his failure to attend and failure to take steps to prosecute the claim to be unreasonable conduct.
On the holiday-pay issue, the tribunal was satisfied on the material before it that the claimant was not entitled to any further payment in respect of accrued but untaken holiday because the respondent had ultimately paid him on the more favourable basis that he had claimed. The claim for outstanding holiday pay was therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Complaint for unpaid holiday pay on termination of employment. Tribunal dismissed the claim after considering the available evidence and the claimant's non-attendance. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 47 Employment Tribunal Rules 2013
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.