Employment Tribunal awards £392k for Accrued Holiday Pay
A property manager has been awarded nearly £392,000 after succeeding in a long-running claim for unpaid holiday entitlement built up over decades of service.
Agreement to Carry Forward Holiday Entitlement Upheld
The Employment Tribunal found that Mr Mohamed Ageli, who had worked for Sabtina Limited since 1987, had accrued a substantial amount of untaken leave which had been carried forward year after year under a contractual arrangement. On termination of his employment in March 2024, the tribunal ruled that he was entitled to £391,942 in unpaid holiday pay.
Evidence of Refused Leave and Workload Pressure
The tribunal accepted evidence that Mr Ageli had been repeatedly unable to take leave due to workload pressures, particularly in the earlier years of his employment. Contemporary documents showed numerous requests for holiday had been refused, and the tribunal found that an agreement had developed allowing unused entitlement to roll over indefinitely and be paid at a later date.
Tribunal Confirms Long‑term Holiday Accrual can be Enforceable
It concluded that this arrangement continued throughout his employment, supported by earlier payments made in lieu of leave and internal records tracking accumulated entitlement. By the time of his dismissal, the tribunal calculated that he had accrued more than 1,500 days of holiday, of which over 800 days remained unpaid after deductions for leave taken and earlier payments.
Unfair Dismissal Findings and ACAS Code uplift
In addition to the holiday pay award, the tribunal found that Mr Ageli had been unfairly dismissed. It held that the employer had failed to carry out a proper disciplinary process, had not provided clear reasons for dismissal, and had denied him the opportunity to respond to allegations or appeal the decision.
The tribunal rejected the employer’s claim that the dismissal was for gross misconduct, finding instead that the decision was made after Mr Ageli had already been stripped of his responsibilities and that the employer later sought to justify the dismissal by relying on historic issues.
A basic award of £14,070 and a compensatory award of £91,489 were also made, with the tribunal applying a 25% uplift to part of the compensation due to a failure to follow the Acas Code of Practice.
Key Risks for Employers Allowing leave to Accumulate
The case illustrates the significant financial exposure employers may face where holiday entitlement is allowed to accumulate over long periods, particularly where there is evidence of an agreement permitting leave to be carried forward and paid on termination.
Please contact us if you would like more information about the issues raised in this article or any aspect of employment law.
Case Details
Mohamed Ageli v Sabtina Limited
Watford Employment Tribunal
Employment Judge Alliott
Judgment sent: 10 March 2026
What Employers Should take from this Case
This decision is a stark reminder that allowing holiday entitlement to roll over year after year, particularly where employees are discouraged or prevented from taking leave, can create very significant and unexpected financial liability. Informal or long‑standing arrangements, poor holiday record‑keeping, and failures to follow fair disciplinary and dismissal procedures can all be examined many years later, with costly consequences.
If this judgment resonates with your organisation, or if you would like advice on managing holiday entitlement, reviewing policies and practices, or handling disciplinary and dismissal processes, our employment law team would be happy to help. Please contact us to discuss how we can support you.
About the Author
David is a solicitor-advocate with higher rights of audience since 2014. He qualified as a solicitor in 2013 and joined Machins in 2019 after over a decade at BT and two years at a City law firm. David advises on all aspects of employment law and has represented clients in more than 150 tribunal hearings.

Disclaimer: General Information Provided Only.
Please note that the contents of this article are intended solely for general information purposes and should not be considered as legal advice.