Case 3200296/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Humphries v Cleaning Twenty-Four Seven Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3200296/2023
- Decision date
- 21 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Humphries
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place on 21 August 2023 before Employment Judge J S Burns. There was no attendance by or on behalf of either party. The tribunal record notes that the claimant’s representative was telephoned, said he had received the notice of hearing issued on 3 March 2023 but had forgotten it, and asked for an adjournment. The judge refused the adjournment because the parties had had ample notice, the request was made after the hearing time, and the claims were small in amount so it was not proportionate to adjourn.
The tribunal proceeded on the ET1 and ET3 only. On the notice pay issue, the judge found it was clear that the claimant had resigned without giving notice, so she was not entitled to notice pay and that claim was dismissed. On holiday pay, the respondent admitted in its ET3 that it owed the claimant £60 holiday pay, and the tribunal held that the holiday pay claim succeeded to that extent.
The judgment therefore orders the respondent to pay the claimant £60 in lieu of holidays by 11 September 2023, and dismisses the notice pay claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The claim for notice pay was dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant had resigned without giving notice and was therefore not entitled to notice pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The respondent admitted owing the claimant £60 holiday pay, and the tribunal ordered payment of that sum. | Upheld | — | £60 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £60
- 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.