Case 6000727/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Rowe v Everest Travel (Dorset) Ltd and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 6000727/2024
- Decision date
- 12 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Deeley Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr C Rowe
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 28 February 2024. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages relating to five shifts, dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice, and failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement covering 74.66 hours. The respondent was ordered to pay £930 gross for the unlawful deductions, £600 gross in damages for breach of contract on notice, and £1120 gross for holiday pay, totalling £2650. The hearing listed on 18 July 2024 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions from wages relating to five shifts; £930 gross. | Upheld | — | £930 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £600 gross. | Upheld | — | £600 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay holiday entitlement; £1120 gross for 74.66 hours' holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £1,120 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,650
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals 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.