Case 3332317/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2018
- Case reference
- 3332317/2018
- Decision date
- 14 June 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal treated the claim as one for statutory annual leave under the Working Time Regulations 1998. The claimant remained employed, had been paid in full, and confirmed that there was no occasion on which he asked to take annual leave and was refused. His complaint was that he had been unable to carry forward more untaken leave from the 2017-2018 leave year.
The tribunal found the claim was in time after extending time, because the claimant did not know until June 2018 that his carry-forward was limited to 13 days and it had not been reasonably practicable to present the claim earlier.
On the merits, the tribunal found no refusal by the respondent to permit annual leave. The claimant had opportunities to take leave, had taken one week in March 2017, was reminded in July 2017 to say if he intended to take leave, and had only a small number of formal meeting days during the period. The tribunal accepted that he was not in the right frame of mind to take holiday during a stressful period, but held that this was not the applicable test, so the claim failed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | The claim concerned statutory annual leave under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and loss of carry-over of untaken leave from 2017-2018. The claimant confirmed he did not bring an unlawful deductions claim and had not asked to take annual leave and been refused. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Working Time Regulations 1998 regulation 30
- Working Time Regulations 1998 regulation 13(1)
- Working Time Regulations 1998 regulation 13A(2)
- HMRC v Stringer [2009] ICR 932
- Kreuziger v Land Berlin (C-619-16)
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.