Case 8000452/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Haughey v Northwind s Limited t/a Goals — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000452/2024
- Decision date
- 17 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge McCluskey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Haughey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr B Haughey worked for Northwind 5s Limited trading as Goals from 13 February 2023 until 21 February 2024 as a Finance Business Partner. The dispute concerned two matters: notice pay and holiday pay on termination. The tribunal accepted that the offer letter referred to three months' notice, but found that the contract of employment signed on 2 February 2023 superseded the offer letter and required the claimant to give one month's notice after probation.
On the events of 21 February 2024, the tribunal found that the claimant admitted using the respondent's pre-paid debit card for personal transactions and that, when told he was to be suspended pending investigation, he said he was resigning with immediate effect. The tribunal accepted the respondent's evidence that there was no discussion about notice periods and found that the claimant's immediate resignation and later email did not amount to giving contractual notice. Applying Geys v Société Générale, London Branch, the tribunal held that the claimant purported to terminate the contract without proper notice and was in repudiatory breach. The respondent's email accepting notice brought the contract to an end, and the claimant's claim for notice pay therefore failed.
The holiday pay claim succeeded. The parties agreed that on termination the claimant had 26.1 hours of accrued but untaken holiday worth £629.61. The tribunal found that the respondent's email saying the claimant would be paid in full for February addressed salary only, and that neither that email nor the February payslip referred to holiday pay. It also held that regulation 35 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 prevented contracting out of the statutory obligation to pay accrued holiday on termination. The tribunal therefore awarded £629.61, with the claimant responsible for any tax or National Insurance.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim. The tribunal found the signed contract required the claimant to give one month's notice, not three months. It further found he resigned with immediate effect and gave no notice, so he was in repudiatory breach and was not entitled to damages. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had not paid accrued but untaken holiday on termination under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The parties agreed the accrued holiday was 26.1 hours, worth £629.61. | Upheld | — | £630 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £630
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- Geys v Société Générale, London Branch 2013 ICR 117, SC
- regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998
- regulation 35 of the Working Time Regulations 1998
- balance of probabilities
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.