Case 6004668/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Megan White v Too Creme de Coffee Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004668/2025
- Decision date
- 9 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Date
Parties
3 namedMs Megan White
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningJudgment on reconsideration arising from an earlier judgment of 31 July 2025 (which had awarded £400.73 holiday pay against the first respondent). The Employment Judge varied the previous judgment to include further sums that had been omitted on the misunderstanding that they had already been dealt with by separate order; the variation is in the interests of justice.
The additional sums included relate to: (a) unpaid wages of £1,627.45 (confirmed by the claimant on 13 June 2025 and not contested by the respondent); (b) failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars under s.38 Employment Act 2002, attracting an award of 2 weeks' pay at £472.50 gross/week (£13.50/hour x 35 hours/week) = £945 (the 4-week award was not made as there was no obvious basis for an increase given the employment lasted only 2 months); and (c) a possible ACAS Code uplift under s.207A TULRCA 1992, which the judge declined to make as the claimant's complaints about unpaid wages had not been raised as a formal grievance.
The varied judgment orders the first respondent to pay £2,973.18 in total. The claim against the second respondent (Ms Lisa O'Keefe) remains dismissed. The amounts fall within s.62 of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 and the respondent must account to HMRC for tax and national insurance.
Claims and outcomes
3 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Upheld | — | £401 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £1,627 |
| Other | Upheld | — | £945 |
Legal tests applied
5 referencesRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,973
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.