Case 2601845/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Mr R Drakeley v Wrates Scholastic Photographs Limited — 2022

Case reference: 2601845/2021
Decision date: 27 January 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Brewer Representation
Venue: Midlands East

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr R Drakeley

Respondent

Wrates Scholastic Photographs Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant worked for the respondent from August 2018 until 31 March 2021 as a school photographer. The tribunal found that the contract limited holiday to school closure periods, that this was explained at interview, and that the claimant was entitled to four weeks in August, two weeks in December and bank holidays. It also found that during furlough from 22 March 2020 the respondent paid employees at 80% and chose not to top up pay to 100%.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

This 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
Unlawful deduction from wages	Claim for unauthorized deductions from wages relating to 2020 holiday pay.	Dismissed	—	—
Working time regulations	Holiday pay claim under the Working Time Regulations 1998 for 2020 leave; the tribunal found no entitlement to carry over leave under the coronavirus amendment.	Dismissed	—	—
Working time regulations	Holiday pay claim for 2021 leave; the respondent accepted the gross sum due, payable subject to tax and National Insurance deductions.	Upheld	—	£613

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £613; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

6 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.