Case 3212752/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Farah Barhoun Enouali v Adams Leisure Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3212752/2020
- Decision date
- 5 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Farah Barhoun Enouali
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Farah Barhoun Enouali brought a claim for one month's pay, saying she had not been paid for June 2020 and was due £333.20 gross. The tribunal found that she had been furloughed during June 2020, had not been asked to return to work during that month, and was ordinarily entitled to furlough pay for that period.
The tribunal rejected the Respondent's argument that clause 12.5 of the employment contract prevented recovery of the June pay. It found that the Claimant had not given notice to terminate her employment in the manner required by clause 12.2, so the contract continued until 10 August 2020, when she received the letter stating that her employment was deemed terminated. The tribunal also rejected the suggestion that the contract ended on 30 June 2020 from the P45, and rejected the Respondent's hearing submission that it ended on 31 July 2020.
The tribunal noted that the Respondent had not brought an employer's contract claim. On the evidence before it, the Claimant was available for work during June 2020 and was entitled to be paid the furlough pay the Respondent had agreed to pay. The claim therefore succeeded in the sum of £333.20 gross.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from pay in relation to June 2020 and awarded £333.20 gross. | Upheld | — | £333 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £333
- 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.