Case 6009601/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Jennings v Rafters Cleaning Ltd. — 2025
- Case reference
- 6009601/2024
- Decision date
- 13 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Jennings
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the case under Rule 21 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Quill decided that a determination could properly be made on the claim, or part of it, in the respondent's absence.
The sole substantive finding recorded in the judgment was that the respondent had failed to pay Ms S Jennings's holiday entitlement. The tribunal therefore upheld that claim element and ordered Rafters Cleaning Ltd to pay £146.63.
No other claim type, legal test, or separate remedy breakdown is stated in the extracted judgment text. The judgment was dated 13 December 2024 and sent to the parties on 13 February 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal made a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. It found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £146.63. | Upheld | — | £147 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £147
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21, 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.