Case 6018211/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr O Driver v The Mates Group Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6018211/2024
- Decision date
- 25 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr O Driver
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined under Rule 22 that Mr O Driver’s complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay was well-founded. It awarded him £11,250 as damages, noting that the amount was calculated using gross pay because of the likelihood that the sum would be treated as Post Employment Notice Pay and taxed accordingly.
The tribunal also found the holiday pay complaint well-founded. It held that The Mates Group Limited was in breach of contract for failing to pay holiday accrued but untaken when employment ended, and awarded £497.40 as the net value due to the claimant.
Taken together, the awards total £11,747.40. The written notice also states that statutory interest would run from 25 February 2025 at 8% per annum if the award remained unpaid after 14 days, and the hearing listed for 7 April 2025 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Complaint in relation to notice pay. The tribunal awarded £11,250 as damages for breach of contract and said the figure was calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant would have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £11,250 |
| Breach of contract | Complaint in respect of holiday pay. The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of contract in failing to pay the claimant for holiday accrued but not taken when employment ended and awarded £497.40 as the net value due. | Upheld | — | £497 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,747
- across all upheld claims
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.