Case 3304321/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Bazleys Pubs and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 3304321/2022
- Decision date
- 18 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams
Parties
3 namedClaimant
In person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant for 81.5 hours worked between 24 January 2022 and 10 February 2022. Applying the hourly rate of £8.91, it awarded £726.16 gross for unpaid wages.
The tribunal also found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant any holiday pay throughout her employment from 10 April 2021 to 10 February 2022. The claimant was employed on a zero hours contract, and the tribunal used weekly pay of £219 gross for the purposes of the Working Time Regulations 1998, awarding £1,031.52 gross for unpaid holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay for 81.5 hours worked between 24 January 2022 and 10 February 2022 at £8.91 per hour. | Upheld | — | £726 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay any holiday pay during the claimant's employment from 10 April 2021 to 10 February 2022 and calculated entitlement under the Working Time Regulations 1998 using weekly pay of £219 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,032 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,758
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Working Time Regulations 1998, SI 1998/1833
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.