Miss S Kinghorn v The Suntrap Bar Ltd and O D Ames: 2500975/2024
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant’s claims against the second respondent are not well-founded and are dismissed.[2]The claimant’s complaint of unauthorised deduction of wages is well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages in the period 5 February 2024 to 11 February 2024. The respondent shall pay the claimant £400, which is the gross sum deducted. The claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or national insurance.[3]The complaint in respect of holiday pay is well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages by failing to pay the claimant for holidays accrued but not taken on the date the claimant’s employment ended. The respondent shall pay the claimant £200. The claimant is responsible for paying any tax or national insurance.[4]The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay is well-founded. The respondent shall pay the claimant £400 as damages for breach of contract. Case No: 2500975/2024 This figure has been calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant will have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay.[5]The claimant’s complaint that the respondent breached Regulation 11 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 is not well-founded and is dismissed.[6]The claimant’s claim of automatic unfair dismissal is not well founded and is dismissed.[7]The claimant’s complaint that she was subjected to a detriment for alleging that the respondent had infringed her statutory rights, in accordance with section 45A of the Employment Rights Act 1996, is not well-founded and is dismissed.[8]Total Award = £1000