Case 2503651/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Shepherd First v Leighanne Wilson Second Respondent: Darren Keenan — 2020
- Case reference
- 2503651/2019
- Decision date
- 9 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Signed
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Shepherd First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss L Shepherd presented her claim on 23 October 2019. Because no response was received, the tribunal dealt with the matter under rule 21. At the hearing on 9 March 2020, Employment Judge Sweeney found that Leighanne Wilson ran and operated the salon, offered the claimant employment, controlled her work, and paid her wages. Darren Keenan was found not to have offered the employment, controlled the claimant's work, or been responsible for paying her wages, so the claim against him was dismissed.
The tribunal accepted that Ms Shepherd was employed from 13 October 2018 to 27 July 2019 and was paid £8.50 an hour. It found that she had 11 accrued but unpaid days of holiday at £51 a day, so the claim for accrued but untaken holiday pay succeeded and £561 gross was awarded. The tribunal also found that the First Respondent had never given her an itemised pay statement, in breach of section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996, and that weekly £50 deductions for tax and national insurance were unnotified deductions within section 12 ERA 1996. It ordered payment of £650 for the 13-week period before the claim, bringing the total award to £1,211.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Claim for accrued but untaken holiday pay. The tribunal found the claimant had 11 accrued but unpaid days at £51 per day and ordered the First Respondent to pay £561 gross. | Upheld | — | £561 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the First Respondent had never given the claimant itemised pay statements in breach of section 8 ERA 1996 and that weekly £50 deductions for tax and national insurance were unnotified deductions within section 12 ERA 1996. It ordered £650 for the 13-week period before the claim. | Upheld | — | £650 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,211
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
5 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 11(1)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 12(3) and (4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 12(4) and (5) 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.