Case 6018607/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ian Ratcliffe v The Spotted Cow — 2025
- Case reference
- 6018607/2024
- Decision date
- 19 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Brown REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ian Ratcliffe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found the complaint in respect of holiday pay to be well-founded. It held that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages by failing to pay for holiday accrued but not taken when the claimant's employment ended, and ordered payment of 397.60 pounds.
The tribunal also found that, when the proceedings were begun, the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide the claimant with a written statement of employment particulars. It considered it just and equitable to award an amount equal to four weeks' gross pay under section 38 Employment Act 2002, amounting to 251.68 pounds.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the holiday pay complaint was well-founded and that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay for accrued but untaken holiday. | Upheld | — | £398 |
| Other | The judgment states that when proceedings began the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars and awarded four weeks' gross pay under section 38 Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £252 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £649
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.