Case 3321155/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 3321155/2019
- Decision date
- 25 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Members
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Mr T Chapman, Mrs E Davey
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Watford on 3 February, 10 and 11 March 2021, before Employment Judge R Lewis with Mr T Chapman and Mrs E Davey, the tribunal heard the claimant in person and the respondent represented by counsel. The written judgment records that the claimant's claims for arrears of holiday pay, pay and notice pay failed and were dismissed.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant's race discrimination claims failed and were dismissed. No separate reasons, findings of fact, or legal analysis are included in the written record supplied here beyond those outcome statements.
The record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The judgment refers to "arrears of holiday pay" but gives no separate reasons or award in the written record. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Mapped from the judgment's reference to "pay"; the written record does not separate this head further. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Mapped from the judgment's reference to notice pay; no separate remedy or reasoning is recorded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's race discrimination claims failed and were dismissed, without further detail in the written record. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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.