Case 3201760/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Ms E Ahmet v Martin James-Lyons Applebee — 2024

Case reference: 3201760/2023
Decision date: 26 January 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Gordon Walker

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms E Ahmet

Respondent

Martin James-Lyons Applebee

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a Rule 21 hearing on 25 January 2024 before Employment Judge Gordon Walker, the respondent did not attend and the tribunal determined the claims on the material available. It found that the holiday pay, unlawful deductions from wages, redundancy payment, failure to provide a contract of employment, and disability discrimination claims were made out, and it awarded immediate sums of £496.54, £272, £4,275 and £325.76 respectively, giving a total immediate award of £5,369.30.

The holiday pay claim succeeded. The judgment records that 7 days at £50.66 per day was £354.66, not £254.66 as stated at the hearing, and it also states that the award of £496.54 was £100 less than the figure given at the hearing. The unlawful deductions claim, described as unauthorised deductions from wages involving national minimum wage, also succeeded for £272.

The redundancy payment claim succeeded, but the tribunal corrected the claimant's age at dismissal from 55 to 54 when calculating the award, which produced the figure of £4,275. The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to give the claimant a contract of employment and awarded two weeks' pay, calculated by reference to 16 hours per week at national minimum wage.

On disability discrimination, the tribunal found that Ms E Ahmet was disabled within section 6 Equality Act 2010 because of arthritis in her hand. It held that her dismissal was contrary to section 15 Equality Act 2010 and that the respondent had failed to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate her return to work from sick leave in June 2023, contrary to sections 20-21. Compensation for the disability discrimination claim was left to a hearing listed for 16 April 2024.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Holiday pay	The tribunal treated the holiday pay claim as well founded. It recorded that 7 days at £50.66 per day was £354.66, not £254.66 as stated at the hearing, and said the award of £496.54 was £100 less than the figure given at the hearing.	Upheld	—	£497
Unlawful deduction from wages	The claim was for unauthorised deductions from wages, identified in the judgment as national minimum wage issues.	Upheld	—	£272
Redundancy	The redundancy payment was awarded after the tribunal corrected the claimant's age at dismissal from 55 to 54 for the calculation.	Upheld	—	£4,275
Other	The respondent failed to give the claimant a contract of employment. The award was two weeks' pay, calculated at 16 hours per week at national minimum wage.	Upheld	—	£326
Disability discrimination	The tribunal found that Ms E Ahmet was disabled within section 6 Equality Act 2010 by reason of arthritis in her hand. It held that her dismissal was an act of disability discrimination contrary to section 15 Equality Act 2010 and that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate her return to work from sick leave in June 2023, contrary to sections 20-21. Compensation was listed for a later hearing on 16 April 2024.	Upheld	Disability	—

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £5,369; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

3 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.

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.