Case 6001542/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Brameld v Prelle Healthcare Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 6001542/2023
- Decision date
- 6 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Brameld
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Leeds CVP hearing on 6 February 2024, before Employment Judge Bright, the respondent did not attend and the claimant appeared in person. The tribunal gave judgment orally and later recorded it in writing. The decision states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The tribunal upheld the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered the respondent to pay £196, described as the gross sum deducted. It also upheld the notice pay complaint as a breach of contract claim and awarded £184.97 in damages, calculated using gross pay so as to reflect the likelihood that the claimant would have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay.
The tribunal further upheld the holiday pay complaint. It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay the claimant for holidays accrued but not taken when employment ended, and ordered payment of £266.33. The total monetary award recorded by the judgment is £647.30.
Claims and outcomes
3 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 repayment of the gross sum deducted. | Upheld | — | £196 |
| Breach of contract | The notice pay complaint was upheld and damages were awarded using gross pay to reflect likely tax treatment as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £185 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages for accrued holiday not taken when employment ended. | Upheld | — | £266 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £647
- 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.