Case 3302746/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Olivier Delicatessen Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3302746/2020
- Decision date
- 9 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hanning
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the remote hearing on 9 March 2021, Employment Judge Hanning sitting alone found that Mrs Mariola Rogala was a worker of Olivier Delicatessen Limited within section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The respondent did not attend the hearing.
The tribunal upheld the claim for unpaid annual leave. It found that 22.5 days of accrued but untaken annual leave had not been paid at a daily rate of £90, and ordered payment of £2,025. It also upheld the breach of contract claim for one week's notice pay and ordered £450.
The tribunal dismissed the claim for sick pay as not well founded. It also dismissed the claim for loss of earnings attributable to the dismissal as not well founded. The total award recorded by the judgment was £2,475.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay for 22.5 days' accrued untaken annual leave at a daily rate of £90 when employment ended. | Upheld | — | £2,025 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found a breach of contract in failing to pay one week's notice pay. | Upheld | — | £450 |
| Other | The claim for sick pay was found not well founded and dismissed; the judgment does not further classify the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claim for loss of earnings attributable to the dismissal was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,475
- 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.