Case 6023263/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ellie Mason v MB House of Hair Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6023263/2024
- Decision date
- 30 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Elliott Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ellie Mason
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEllie Mason brought claims against MB House of Hair Limited concerning an unauthorised deduction from her basic pay in her final payslip, holiday accrued to termination of employment, and an alleged underpayment of national minimum wage. The tribunal found the first two complaints well-founded. In both instances the respondent accepted liability, and the tribunal ordered payment of the gross sums claimed: £44.70 for the unpaid basic pay and £680.97 for holiday pay accrued on termination. The judgment states that the claimant is responsible for any tax or National Insurance due on those sums.
The tribunal dismissed the claim relating to underpayment of national minimum wage, finding that complaint was not well-founded. No further reasons were provided in the written judgment because reasons had been given orally at the hearing and written reasons would only be provided on request. The bottom-line monetary award recorded in the judgment is £725.67.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint about an unauthorised deduction from basic pay in the claimant's final payslip; respondent accepted liability. | Upheld | — | £45 |
| Holiday pay | Complaint about holiday accrued to termination of employment; respondent accepted liability for the sum specified by the claimant. | Upheld | — | £681 |
| Other | Complaint in respect of an underpayment of national minimum wage. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £726
- 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.