Case 6003201/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Luis Meneses-Campins v Premium Support Services Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003201/2025
- Decision date
- 10 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Duff REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Luis Meneses-Campins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing at London Central by CVP on 11 June 2025, before Employment Judge Duff, the tribunal dealt with two remaining money claims brought by Mr Luis Meneses-Campins against Premium Support Services Limited. The holiday pay claim did not proceed to a substantive determination because the respondent confirmed that annual leave accrued during sick leave had been carried over, and the claimant accepted that he had not taken annual leave that remained unpaid. The tribunal therefore recorded the holiday pay claim as dismissed as withdrawn.
The claimant's claim for unpaid statutory sick pay was dismissed. The tribunal found that he did not meet the threshold for statutory sick pay. It also recorded that he had been overpaid for a period of sick leave because of an administrative error by the respondent, and that the respondent agreed not to pursue repayment of that overpayment. No monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Claim for unpaid holiday pay was dismissed as withdrawn after the respondent confirmed, and the claimant accepted, that annual leave accrued during sick leave had been carried over and that he had not taken annual leave that had not been paid for. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Claim for unpaid statutory sick pay was dismissed because the claimant did not meet the threshold for statutory sick pay. The tribunal also recorded that he had been overpaid for part of his sick leave because of an administrative error, and that the respondent agreed not to pursue repayment of the overpayment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.