Case 2502678/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Harrison v The Breadbasket (Teesside) Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2502678/2019
- Decision date
- 29 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
- Venue
- Middlesbrough
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Harrison
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Middlesbrough on 29 November 2019, Employment Judge JM Wade heard the claimant, Mr B Harrison, in person, accompanied by his father, and the respondent, The Breadbasket (Teesside) Ltd, represented by Mr PW Fitzsimmons. The judgment records that the claimant's complaints of failure to pay holiday pay and unlawful deductions from wages succeeded.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £2,000. The judgment does not provide a further breakdown of that sum between the two successful complaints, and it does not record any additional findings, statutory test, or separate remedy components.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal recorded that the complaint of failure to pay holiday pay succeeded. The judgment does not split the £2,000 gross award between this claim and the unlawful deductions claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal recorded that the complaint of unlawful deductions from wages succeeded. The judgment does not allocate any separate sum to this claim. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,000
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.