Case 1805725/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Somoye v Omnia Protect Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1805725/2021
- Decision date
- 11 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Leeds via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Somoye
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningJudge Moxon found that Mr A Somoye was an employee of Omnia Protect Limited. The respondent did not attend and was not represented at the hearing on 11 January 2022. The tribunal upheld the claimant's claim for an unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of June 2021, finding that the respondent had failed to pay the full amount due. The judgment records that the claimant's annual salary was £22,650, which equated to £1,887.50 for the month, less £360 paid, leaving £1,527.50 outstanding.
The tribunal also upheld the claim for an unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of untaken annual leave on termination. It found that the claimant had accrued 14 days' holiday between 1 January 2021 and 30 June 2021, had taken 8 days, and therefore had 6 days accrued but untaken. Applying a daily rate of £87.12, the tribunal ordered payment of £522.72 gross for that entitlement. The written record does not indicate any separate award for interest or other remedy components.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages for the unpaid balance of June 2021 salary. | Upheld | — | £1,528 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages for payment in lieu of accrued but untaken annual leave on termination. | Upheld | — | £523 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,050
- 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.