The Claimant was awarded over £80,000 in holiday pay but the ET ruled that this amount would vest in his trustee in bankruptcy. The ET rejected the argument that the award fell outside the definition of property, where they are “personal” rather than “proprietary” and held that there was no element of compensation which fell within the categories set out in Heath v Tang, which were by reference to pain felt by the bankrupt in relation to ‘body, mind or character’. The ET also decided not to apply interest to the award. The Claimant appealed on both points.

The EAT rejected the first point but allowed the appeal on the second issue. The ET was right to rule that the Claimant’s claim for a failure to provide him with paid leave was a proprietary claim which vested in his trustee in bankruptcy, but erred in its refusal to award any interest-like compensation to reflect the diminution in the value of money between the dates when it should have been paid and the date of judgment.