Case 3313570/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v C Hava — 2024
- Case reference
- 3313570/2023
- Decision date
- 23 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bloch KC
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, a Beauty Therapist employed by the respondent from 1 October 2010 until 6 October 2023, resigned and agreed to work five weeks' notice. The respondent did not pay her for those five weeks of work and did not pay outstanding holiday pay. The respondent did not file a response and did not attend the hearing, which proceeded under Rule 21 with the claimant giving evidence in person.
Employment Judge Bloch KC accepted the claimant's evidence, supported by a payslip dated 25 August 2023 shown on her phone, that her net weekly pay was GBP 375.76 and her holiday pay was GBP 83.36 net per week. On that basis the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of GBP 1,878.80 for five weeks' unpaid wages and GBP 416.80 for unpaid holiday pay, totalling GBP 2,295.60 net.
The claimant accepted there was no separate claim in respect of the notice period because she had worked it. No discrimination, unfair dismissal or other heads of claim were adjudicated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | 5 weeks unpaid wages at GBP 375.76 net per week = GBP 1,878.80; tribunal treated unpaid wages as unauthorised deductions under the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,879 |
| Holiday pay | Untaken and unpaid holiday pay at GBP 83.36 net per week x 5 = GBP 416.80. | Upheld | — | £417 |
| Breach of contract | Claimant accepted there was no claim for notice period since notice had been worked; no award made on any contract/notice claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,296
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.