Case 3205142/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S O’Donoghue v Mayfair Estate Planning — 2021
- Case reference
- 3205142/2021
- Decision date
- 16 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Goodrich
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S O’Donoghue
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss S O’Donoghue’s claims against Mayfair Estate Planning Limited were heard by Employment Judge Goodrich sitting alone at East London Hearing Centre on 16 December 2021. The Respondent did not appear and was not represented. The tribunal recorded that the Claimant’s application for leave to amend was granted so that claims for holiday pay and breach of contract for notice pay and expenses could be determined.
The tribunal upheld the Claimant’s claim for unlawful deductions from wages and ordered the Respondent to pay £5,547.07. It also upheld the holiday pay claim and ordered payment of £1,590.70. The breach of contract claims were upheld as well, with the award broken down as £769.23 for notice pay and £33.60 for expenses.
The judgment states a grand total of £7,940.60 payable by the Respondent to the Claimant. No other remedy components were identified in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £5,547 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,591 |
| Breach of contract | Award comprised £769.23 for notice pay and £33.60 for expenses. | Upheld | — | £803 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,941
- 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.