Case 6012462/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Tribunal upholds holiday-pay and breach-of-contract claims against Reliance Maintenance Ltd
The respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
- Case reference
- 6012462/2024
- Decision date
- 25 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Andrews
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £625 gross. It also found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and awarded £1,100 gross.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment; the tribunal stated the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £625 |
| Holiday pay | Rule 21 judgment; the tribunal stated the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,100 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,725
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 - Rule 21
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.