Case 3300401/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs E Cook v Peak Paye Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3300401/2023
- Decision date
- 18 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs E Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs E Cook was employed by Peak Paye Ltd from 23 February 2022 as a learning mentor/teaching assistant on £9.50 per hour. In October 2022 the Respondent told staff it had payment issues and suggested transfer to a new umbrella company. The Claimant queried the impact on Statutory Maternity Pay, sent her MATB1 form and desired maternity leave dates on 13 October 2022, and on 27 October 2022 received an email stating that the Respondent was no longer in a position to offer payroll services and would be issuing P45s.
The tribunal found that the 27 October 2022 email amounted to notice of termination. Applying the contractual notice term of three weeks, it found the effective date of termination was 17 November 2022. The Claimant had not been paid notice, and the tribunal calculated notice damages by reference to her average weekly pay of £367.71, awarding £1,103.13 for breach of contract. It also found unauthorised deductions from wages: six hours' pay for 18 July 2022 at £9.50 per hour, plus four weeks of employer pension contributions at £13.30 per week, making £110.20. The sums ordered total £1,213.33.
The pregnancy and maternity discrimination complaint failed. The tribunal accepted that the Respondent's decision to enter voluntary creditors' liquidation could in theory affect the Claimant's SMP position, but it found the treatment was not because she was pregnant or intended to exercise maternity leave rights. It held that the burden of proof had not shifted. The tribunal also said it had no jurisdiction to decide entitlement to SMP, which was for HMRC, citing Hair Division Ltd v Macmillan EAT 0033/12, and it adjourned generally the SMP-related unlawful deduction claim for six months until 7 March 2024 or further order.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unpaid wages for 18 July 2022 at six hours x £9.50 and unpaid employer pension contributions for four weeks, totalling £110.20. | Upheld | — | £110 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the Claimant was entitled to three weeks' notice under the contract, accepted an effective date of termination of 17 November 2022, and awarded notice pay based on average weekly pay of £367.71. | Upheld | — | £1,103 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal found the Claimant had not shown that the treatment was because she was pregnant or intended to exercise maternity rights, and held the burden of proof had not shifted. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,213
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Hair Division Ltd v Macmillan EAT 0033/12
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.