Partial win £3,061 awarded Employment Tribunal · 11 April 2023

Former employee awarded £3,060 for unpaid holiday pay and notice

A former employee who was not paid her accrued holiday pay or notice pay has been awarded £3,060.72 by an employment tribunal. Her claims for unfair dismissal and age discrimination were dismissed.

1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026

Case details

Key facts

  • The claimant was employed from 15 October 2021 to 17 May 2022.
  • The claimant's daily net rate was £92.53.
  • The claimant accrued 14.5 days of untaken holiday.
  • The respondent failed to pay the claimant her accrued holiday pay.
  • The respondent failed to pay the claimant one week's notice pay.
  • The respondent failed to provide written particulars of employment.

Timeline

  1. Employment start

    Claimant began employment with SteamCardiff Limited.

  2. Employment end

    Claimant's employment ended.

  3. First judgment

    Employment Judge S Jenkins dismissed disability discrimination and claims against second respondent; remaining claims to proceed.

  4. Final hearing

    Employment Judge J Bromige heard the case and issued judgment.

The outcome

The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims for automatic unfair dismissal and age discrimination (the latter being out of time). However, it upheld her claims for unpaid holiday pay, notice pay, and failure to provide written particulars.

Compensation breakdown:

  • Holiday pay: £1,341.80 (net)
  • Notice pay (breach of contract): £576.92 (gross)
  • Failure to provide written particulars: £1,142.00 (2 weeks' pay at the statutory cap of £571 per week)
  • Total: £3,060.72

Lessons & takeaways

  • Employers must pay accrued but untaken holiday pay when employment ends, even if the employee leaves before taking their full entitlement.
  • Failing to provide written particulars of employment can result in a separate award of up to 4 weeks' pay, capped at the statutory maximum.
  • Claims for unfair dismissal or discrimination must be brought within strict time limits (usually 3 months minus 1 day from the act complained of).
  • Representing yourself in tribunal is possible, but having legal advice can help ensure all claims are properly presented and within time.

A short employment but a clear legal breach

This case shows that even a relatively short period of employment can give rise to multiple legal claims if the employer fails to meet basic obligations. The former employee worked for SteamCardiff Limited for just over seven months, from October 2021 to May 2022. When her employment ended, she was not paid for 14.5 days of accrued holiday she had not taken, nor was she given her one week's notice pay. The employer also failed to provide written particulars of employment, a basic requirement under the Employment Rights Act 1996.

What the tribunal decided

The tribunal dismissed the more serious claims of automatic unfair dismissal and age discrimination. The unfair dismissal claims were found not to be well-founded, and the age discrimination claims were presented too late – the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them. However, the straightforward claims for unpaid holiday pay, notice pay, and the failure to provide written particulars succeeded. The total award of £3,060.72 reflects the sums due for these clear breaches.

What could have been done differently

For the employer, paying the accrued holiday pay and notice pay at the time of termination would have avoided this claim entirely. Providing written particulars from the start is a legal requirement that costs nothing. For the employee, bringing discrimination claims within the three-month time limit is crucial – missing the deadline means losing the right to pursue them, no matter how strong the case.

Why this matters

This case is a reminder that employment tribunals will enforce basic employment rights even when the employment is short. The awards for holiday pay and written particulars are relatively small but serve as a deterrent to employers who neglect their obligations. For employees, it shows that pursuing a claim in person can still result in a successful outcome for clear-cut breaches.

Similar cases