Cases2402120/2023

Claimant v A Star Care at Home Limited

19 March 2025Before Employment Judge ClineManchester

Outcome

Partly successful£1,386

Individual claims

Holiday Paysucceeded

The claim for outstanding holiday pay succeeded by consent of both parties. The Respondent agreed to pay £1,386 gross representing unpaid accrued holiday entitlement.

Direct Discrimination(disability)failed

The Claimant's claim for discrimination by association on the grounds of disability was not well-founded. The tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish that the Claimant was subjected to less favourable treatment because of her association with a disabled person.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesfailed

The Claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction from wages was not well-founded. The tribunal concluded that the Respondent had not made unlawful deductions from the Claimant's wages during her employment.

Facts

Melissa Redgrave, a self-represented claimant, brought claims against A Star Care at Home Limited for holiday pay, discrimination by association on grounds of disability, and unauthorised deduction from wages. The hearing took place over three days in March 2025 before Employment Judge Cline sitting alone. The Respondent was represented by a consultant, Mr Charles Hancock.

Decision

The tribunal found in favour of the Claimant on the holiday pay claim by consent, awarding £1,386 gross. However, both the discrimination by association claim and the unauthorised deduction from wages claim were dismissed as not well-founded. The Respondent must pay the holiday pay award by 2 April 2025 with interest payable thereafter at 8% per annum if unpaid.

Practical note

Even where a claimant succeeds partially (here on a consented holiday pay claim), discrimination by association claims require robust evidence of less favourable treatment linked to the protected characteristic.

Award breakdown

Holiday pay£1,386

Case details

Case number
2402120/2023
Decision date
19 March 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
3
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep

Claimant representation

Represented
No