Case 1403562/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Robert Ramaboea v Match Options Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1403562/2023
- Decision date
- 5 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Robert Ramaboea
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant's employment was continuing when the judgment was given. It referred to Regulations 13(16)(c), 17 and 18 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 applying to the claimant's entitlement to annual leave for the leave years 2022, 2023 and 2024, and noted the parties' agreement to calculate the corrected balance of annual leave due so that the claimant could exercise his right to annual leave.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant accepted that the respondent was entitled to make deductions in respect of an overpayment made to him on 15 January 2023. On that basis, the tribunal held that the claims for unauthorised deduction of wages and unpaid annual leave were not well founded and dismissed both claims.
The judgment was given orally at the hearing, and the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the decision. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant accepted that the respondent was entitled to make deductions in respect of an overpayment made on 15 January 2023. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment refers to unpaid annual leave under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and records that the parties agreed to calculate the corrected balance of annual leave due while the claimant's employment continued. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.