Case 1601059/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. O Iruagha v Vale Cleaning Services Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 1601059/2024
- Decision date
- 6 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cawthray Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. O Iruagha
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Cardiff on 29 and 30 January 2025 before Employment Judge Cawthray. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr J Vines.
The judgment records that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was not well-founded and was dismissed. It also records that the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. Reasons were given orally and the written record does not include further findings or remedy figures.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was not well-founded and was dismissed. No written reasons or remedy figures are provided. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. No written reasons or remedy figures are provided. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.