Case 1403676/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Gwenzi v Goldstaff Recruitment Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1403676/2023
- Decision date
- 4 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Representation
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Gwenzi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr R Gwenzi suffered an unlawful deduction from wages of £37.50. The deduction related to a part shift worked on 19 April 2023 that had not been paid. The tribunal ordered Goldstaff Recruitment Limited to pay that sum to the claimant.
The written judgment states that all other claims were dismissed. It does not set out separate written reasons for those other claims, and the record notes that the reasons were given orally at the hearing. On the face of the written decision, the only monetary award was the £37.50 awarded for the unlawful deduction claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written record does not separately identify this claim, but it is encompassed by the tribunal's statement that 'all other claims are dismissed'; the case listing identified unfair dismissal as one of the listed categories. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unlawful deduction of £37.50 in respect of a part shift worked on 19 April 2023 but not paid for. | Upheld | — | £38 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £38
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.