Case 6000298/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss I Maitland v Vacation Connections Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6000298/2025
- Decision date
- 21 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leith Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss I Maitland
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the London South Employment Tribunal on 4 January 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Leith decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £3,750. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £2,875.
The judgment records a total sum of £6,625. No separate findings on interest, basic award, compensatory award, or injury to feelings were recorded in the judgment text supplied.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £3,750. | Upheld | — | £3,750 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £2,875. | Upheld | — | £2,875 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,625
- 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.