Case 1406326/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Kassandra Voudouri v Pose AR Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1406326/2023
- Decision date
- 3 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Kassandra Voudouri
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Kassandra Voudouri brought claims against Pose AR Ltd for unauthorised deductions from wages and holiday pay. Employment Judge Rayner heard the case at Southampton on 11 June 2024 and gave judgment orally, with the written record sent to the parties on 3 July 2024.
The tribunal upheld the wages claim, finding that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the pay period 23 August to 23 September 2023. It ordered the respondent to pay £695.09, described as the gross sum deducted, and recorded that the claimant is responsible for any tax or National Insurance due.
The tribunal also upheld the holiday pay claim. It found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay for holidays that had accrued but not been taken when the claimant's employment ended. It ordered payment of £2,771.92, again noting that the claimant is responsible for any tax or National Insurance. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment is £3,467.01.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages in the pay period 23 August to 23 September 2023 and ordered payment of the gross sum deducted. | Upheld | — | £695 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages arising from failure to pay for holidays accrued but not taken on termination of employment. | Upheld | — | £2,772 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,467
- 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.