Case 1801895/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Doroftei v Kame Logistics Ltd (in liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1801895/2020
- Decision date
- 16 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Little Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Doroftei
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in Mr A Doroftei’s claim against Kame Logistics Ltd (in liquidation). The tribunal first dealt with time limits and held that, although the claim had been presented late, it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time and the actual date of presentation was reasonable. The reason given was that the claimant had been misled by the respondent into believing payment would be forthcoming without the need for litigation.
On the merits, the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the net sum of £460.00 forthwith. No other heads of claim or separate remedy elements were recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal accepted the late presentation because it was not reasonably practicable to present in time, finding the claimant had been given misleading information by the respondent which led him to believe payment would be made without litigation. | Upheld | — | £460 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £460
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- not reasonably practicable to present it in time
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.