Case 2502419/2023 · Employment Tribunal
A Cowhig v Rascals Playtime Childcare Limited HELD AT: Newcastle (by video) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2502419/2023
- Decision date
- 7 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A Cowhig
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Aspden, sitting at Newcastle by video on 31 May 2024, found that the respondent had failed to give the claimant itemised pay statements as required by s8 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 between March 2023 and September 2023, and that this failure during her maternity leave amounted to discrimination contrary to the Equality Act 2010. The respondent was ordered to pay £500 as compensation in respect of that discrimination claim.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages by paying late on a number of occasions in 2022 and 2023, and by failing to pay maternity pay (£736.12 and £184.03), holiday pay of £816.75 due under reg 16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and £840.51 due under reg 14 WTR 1998 in respect of untaken leave on termination. The respondent was ordered to pay outstanding wages of £2,577.41, plus £116 to compensate for financial loss attributable to the unlawful deductions.
The claimant's separate claim that the respondent had discriminated against her by paying her late and/or by not paying her during maternity leave was not well founded and was dismissed. The respondent did not attend the hearing; the claimant appeared in person. Written reasons were not provided as the judgment was delivered orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Failure to provide itemised pay statements as required by s8 Employment Rights Act 1996 between March 2023 and September 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Tribunal found the respondent discriminated against the claimant under the Equality Act 2010 by failing to provide itemised pay statements during her maternity leave; £500 compensation ordered. | Upheld | Pregnancy and maternity | £500 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages on a number of occasions in 2022 and 2023 by paying wages late was well founded. Specific sums (maternity pay of £736.12 and £184.03) included in aggregate outstanding wages of £2,577.41. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Unauthorised deductions in respect of holiday pay of £816.75 under reg 16 Working Time Regulations 1998 (leave taken 4-18 October 2023) and £840.51 under reg 14 WTR 1998 in respect of untaken leave on termination. Included in aggregate £2,577.41. | Upheld | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Sums due under regs 14 and 16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 in respect of leave taken and untaken leave on termination. | Upheld |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,193
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- s8 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Equality Act 2010
- reg 14 Working Time Regulations 1998
- reg 16 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.