Case 3300086/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Hassie Koromah v Hertfordshire Building Control Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3300086/2023
- Decision date
- 30 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Young
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Hassie Koromah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Watford on 29 June 2023, Employment Judge Young sitting alone rejected Ms Hassie Koromah's unlawful deduction of wages claim. The judgment states that this claim was not well founded and failed.
The tribunal upheld her separate complaint under section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996 for failure to provide an itemised pay statement. It recorded an award of £765.50 in respect of unnotified deductions.
The tribunal also upheld the claim for contractual holiday pay accrued and payable on termination. It found that Hertfordshire Building Control Limited had not paid 2.5 days' outstanding holiday pay and ordered payment of the gross sum of £382.75. The awards together total £1,148.25.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The judgment describes this as a failure to provide an itemised pay statement contrary to section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996 and records an award of £765.50 in respect of unnotified deductions. | Upheld | — | £766 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found 2.5 days' outstanding holiday pay remained payable on termination and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £382.75. | Upheld | — | £383 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,148
- 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.