Case 6020168/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Weekes v Strive House Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6020168/2024
- Decision date
- 10 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barker REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Weekes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningStrive House Ltd did not present a valid response and did not attend the hearing. The tribunal found the holiday pay complaint well-founded because the claimant had accrued 9.4 weeks' holiday, had taken none by the date his employment ended, and had not been paid for accrued but untaken leave. The respondent was ordered to pay £7,592.29, and the claimant was responsible for any tax or National Insurance.
The tribunal also found the breach of contract complaint in relation to notice pay well-founded. It held that the claimant was entitled to three months' notice and awarded £10,500.00 in damages, calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the payment would be taxed as Post Employment Notice Pay.
During the hearing the claimant withdrew his whistleblowing detriments and sex discrimination claims, and the tribunal dismissed them on that withdrawal. The unfair dismissal claim was not heard on the merits because the tribunal found that the claimant did not have two years' service, so it had no jurisdiction to hear that claim.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages because the claimant had accrued 9.4 weeks' holiday, had taken none by the end of employment, and had not been paid for accrued but untaken leave. | Upheld | — | £7,592 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the notice pay claim well-founded and awarded damages calculated using gross pay to reflect likely tax treatment as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £10,500 |
| Whistleblowing | Withdrawn by the claimant during the hearing and dismissed on that withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Withdrawn by the claimant during the hearing and dismissed on that withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim because the claimant did not have two years' service. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £18,092
- 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.