Case 4107137/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr SR Freeman v White Elephant (WE Glasgow Limited) — 2019
- Case reference
- 4107137/2019
- Decision date
- 16 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Cowen
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr SR Freeman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a single claim for unpaid holiday pay. The respondent did not lodge an ET3 by the notified date of 28 June 2019 and did not apply for an extension of time, so the Tribunal proceeded by default judgment.
The Tribunal first addressed time bar. It accepted the claimant’s evidence that he expected payment for accrued but untaken holiday on 13 March 2019, which was the next payroll date after termination, following email requests made on 15 February 2019 and 4 March 2019. On that basis, the limitation period started on 13 March 2019. The ET1 was received on 29 May 2019, which the Tribunal held was within the three month time limit under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Having found the claim in time and noted the respondent’s non-participation, the Tribunal considered the amount claimed and accepted the claimant’s evidence that £201.02 was owed. Judgment was therefore entered for the claimant in the sum of £201.02 in unpaid holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Default judgment was granted after the respondent failed to present an ET3 or seek an extension of time. | Upheld | — | £201 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £201
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.23 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.