Cases6008926/2025

Claimant v Mobivape Ltd

2 September 2025Before Employment Judge Rice-BirchallLondon Southremote video

Outcome

Claimant succeeds£1,622

Individual claims

Holiday Paysucceeded

The tribunal found the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay the claimant for holidays accrued but not taken on the date employment ended. The complaint was well-founded.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagessucceeded

The tribunal found the respondent failed to provide written itemised pay statements as required by section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996 in September 2024, breaching its statutory duty.

Breach of Contractsucceeded

When proceedings began, the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars. The tribunal found no exceptional circumstances to avoid making an award under section 38 Employment Act 2002.

Facts

The claimant worked for Mobivape Ltd and their employment ended. The respondent failed to pay accrued but untaken holiday pay on termination. The respondent also failed to provide itemised pay statements in September 2024 and failed to provide written statement of employment particulars when proceedings began.

Decision

The tribunal found all claims well-founded. The respondent was ordered to pay £827.08 for unpaid holiday pay and £795.16 (equivalent to two weeks' gross pay) for failure to provide employment particulars under section 38 Employment Act 2002, totalling £1,622.24.

Practical note

Employers must provide itemised pay statements, written statements of employment particulars, and pay accrued holiday pay on termination, with statutory penalties applying for failures to provide required documentation.

Award breakdown

Holiday pay£827
Unpaid wages£795

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.8Employment Act 2002 s.38

Case details

Case number
6008926/2025
Decision date
2 September 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep