Case 3312378/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Stuart Lazenby v Skyline Hire Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3312378/2020
- Decision date
- 6 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Stuart Lazenby
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remote CVP hearing before Employment Judge Alliott sitting alone on 14 April 2021. The claimant, Mr Stuart Lazenby, appeared in person and the respondent, Skyline Hire Limited, was represented by Mr Alan Williams, Solicitor. The judgment was dated 15 April 2021 and sent to the parties on 4 May 2021.
The claimant's case was for notice pay and accrued holiday entitlement said to be outstanding at the date of termination of his employment on 6 September 2020. In the reasons, the tribunal recorded that the claimant confirmed he had been paid his salary for the notice period and that he had no holiday entitlement outstanding at the date of termination. On that basis, the tribunal found he had no claim.
The judgment therefore dismissed the claimant's claim in full. No monetary award was made and the tribunal did not record any separate remedy calculation.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim for notice pay outstanding at termination. The claimant confirmed at the hearing that his salary for the notice period had been paid. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for accrued holiday entitlement outstanding at termination. The claimant confirmed there was no holiday entitlement outstanding at the date of termination, 6 September 2020. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.