Case 3301632/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Allen v Karen Joel, Philip Joel and Jane Joel, in partnership, trading as 'The Old Swan' — 2026
- Case reference
- 3301632/2024
- Decision date
- 7 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Allen
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £823. In the alternative, the tribunal found that the claimant had a contractual entitlement to the same £823 for work performed during employment which remained outstanding on termination, with the parties' agreement being that the claimant was responsible for paying tax to HMRC on the cash sums received, and that the claimant was entitled to damages for breach of contract for that sum.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £141.90, calculated as 12.9 hours at £11 per hour.
The judgment was issued under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024 and approved by Employment Judge Quill on 7 January 2026.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Pleaded in the alternative to the unlawful deduction from wages claim for the same £823 sum; the tribunal accepted the alternative basis. The award is not cumulative with the wages claim. | Upheld | — | £823 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday entitlement of 12.9 hours at £11 per hour, totalling £141.90. | Upheld | — | £142 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £823 for unauthorised deduction from wages. In the alternative, the tribunal found a contractual entitlement to the same £823 as damages for breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £823 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £965
- 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.