Case 6039065/2025 · Employment Tribunal
E MacAulay-Finn v West End Galleries Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6039065/2025
- Decision date
- 6 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
E MacAulay-Finn
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the London South Employment Tribunal on 22 October 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that WEST END GALLERIES LTD made unauthorised deductions from E MacAulay-Finn's wages from 11 May 2025 to 11 September 2025 and ordered the respondent to pay £3,175.56 gross for that claim. It also found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement of 4.6 weeks and ordered payment of £1,431.67 gross for holiday pay.
The respondent was ordered to pay £4,607.23 gross in total. The judgment recorded that the claimant must account to HMRC for any sums owed in respect of payments received under the judgment, and the hearing listed for 01 September 2026 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £3,176 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,432 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,607
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.