Case 1402089/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Sessarego v Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402089/2022
- Decision date
- 17 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr P Sessarego
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 28 June 2022 and the respondent did not present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Rayner determined under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 that the claim, or part of it, could properly be decided without a response.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages, had dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice, had dismissed the claimant by reason of redundancy, and had failed to pay holiday entitlement. It ordered payments of £3,348.48 gross for wages, £2,929.92 for notice damages, £2,929.92 for redundancy pay, and £820.38 for holiday pay, making £10,028.70 in total.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The extracted text shows the wage award as '£3,3348.48', but the judgment's total of £10,028.70 only reconciles if this figure is £3,348.48. | Upheld | — | £3,348 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £2,930 |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,930 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £820 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,029
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 21
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.