Case 8001068/2024 · Employment Tribunal
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8001068/2024 Hearing at Edinburgh by Cloud Video Platform on November 2024 and January 2025 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Ms I Eluka
The claimant was employed by Lidl Great Britain Limited from 21 November 2023 and was contracted initially for 37.5 hours per week, with a contractual holiday year running from 1 April to 31 March. His contract provided for annual salary to be paid in 12 equal monthly instalments, and the Tribunal accepted evidence that annual leave pay was included in standard pay rather than shown as a separate payslip entry.
The Tribunal found that the claimant had received full basic pay for February and March 2024 and had not suffered any deduction for the March days on which he was absent on holiday. It considered the claim to arise from a misunderstanding that holiday pay should be paid in addition to ordinary basic pay, whereas the respondent paid him throughout the year, including when he was absent on annual leave.
The Tribunal concluded that the claimant was paid in respect of each day's holiday taken up to 31 March 2024 at the appropriate rate, that no unauthorised deductions were made from his wages, and that he was not entitled to compensation under section 24(1) or 24(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claim was dismissed.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant complained of being deprived of holiday pay and notice pay, but by closing submission restricted the pursued claim to two days' holiday pay said to be outstanding in March 2024. Other aspects were recorded as not pursued. | Dismissed | — | — |
The 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.
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.