Case 6010130/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Amanda Clare v Mrs Kellie-Jay Keen — 2025
- Case reference
- 6010130/2024
- Decision date
- 20 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Elizabeth Gibson
- Venue
- By Cloud Virtual Platform
Parties
2 namedMs Amanda Clare
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Elizabeth Gibson determined this matter on the Cloud Video Platform on 20 June 2025. The claimant Ms Amanda Clare appeared in person, as did the respondent Mrs Kellie-Jay Keen (leader of the Party of Women). The claimant was employed as a campaigns director assisting candidates in the run-up to the 2024 local elections.
The Judge found the claimant's start date was 25 March 2024 (not 8 April 2024 as the respondent contended), supported by text message evidence and the claimant's witnesses. The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was upheld for two weeks' wages (£1,076.92 gross). The breach of contract / wrongful dismissal claim succeeded with damages of £538.46 (one week's notice). The complaint of holiday pay under regulations 14 and 16 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 was upheld for 3.5 days of pro rata accrued leave (£376.92 gross).
The respondent was also found in breach of the duty under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to provide a written statement of employment particulars. Pursuant to section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 the Tribunal ordered the minimum award of two weeks' pay (£1,076.92), declining to award four weeks' pay given the short period of employment. The total award was £3,069.20.
Claims and outcomes
3 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £1,077 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Upheld | — | £538 |
| Holiday pay | Upheld | — | £377 |
Legal tests applied
9 referencesRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,069
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.