Case 2601978/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Mr R Howell, Director — 2019
- Case reference
- 2601978/2019
- Decision date
- 19 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Clark Representation
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the final hearing in Nottingham on 19 December 2019 before Employment Judge Clark, Miss C Hopkinson’s claim for accrued annual leave outstanding at the date of termination was dismissed, as was her claim for unauthorised deduction from wages. Her breach of contract claim against The Cricketers Pub (Beeston) Limited succeeded.
On the successful breach of contract claim, the tribunal assessed damages at £282.68. It then increased the award by 25% (£70.67) under s.207A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, being satisfied that the employer had unreasonably failed to follow the relevant ACAS Code of Practice when dismissing the claimant. The respondent was ordered to pay a total of £353.35.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Claim for accrued annual leave outstanding at termination was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unauthorised deduction from wages was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract succeeded. The tribunal assessed damages at £282.68 and then increased the award by 25% (£70.67) under s.207A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 after finding the employer had unreasonably failed to follow the relevant ACAS Code of Practice when dismissing the claimant. | Upheld | — | £353 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £353
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.207A Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Schedule A2 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- relevant ACAS Code of Practice
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.