Case 3313312/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Carers Elite Homecare Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3313312/2019
- Decision date
- 19 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle Appearances
- Venue
- Norwich
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Norwich on 19 September 2019, Employment Judge Postle heard the case with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent not represented and not attending. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £395.60 additional holiday pay.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant’s holiday pay had been calculated at a basic rate rather than her average pay, and that this led to the additional amount due. No separate written reasons were provided in the judgment record because reasons were given orally at the hearing unless requested.
The tribunal also made a Rule 76 Preparation Time Order for £99, recording the time the claimant had spent preparing for the proceedings and that the respondent had no reasonable prospect of defending the case in light of the judgment. The total amount recorded in the judgment was £494.60.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal also made a separate Rule 76 Preparation Time Order for £99. | Upheld | — | £396 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £495
- 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.