Case 2200023/2025 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mr. C. Sorano (Case No. 2200023/2025) (2) Mr. A. Gomirato (Case No. 2200024/2025) (3) Mr. M. De Benedictis (Case No. 2200026/2025) (4) Mr. R. Cardenas (Case No. 2200025/2025) (5) Mr. D. Riggio (Case No. 2200027/2025) v Tabisca London Ltd. Hearing: Final Hearing — 2025
- Case reference
- 2200023/2025
- Decision date
- 3 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tinnion Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Mr. C. Sorano (Case No. 2200023/2025) (2) Mr. A. Gomirato (Case No. 2200024/2025) (3) Mr. M. De Benedictis (Case No. 2200026/2025) (4) Mr. R. Cardenas (Case No. 2200025/2025) (5) Mr. D. Riggio (Case No. 2200027/2025)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal proceeded with the final hearing in the absence of Claimants (4) and (5), being satisfied that they had notice of the hearing, had chosen not to attend, and had not applied for it to be postponed. The respondent did not attend. Claimants (1) to (3) attended in person and accepted that the claims were not presented in time.
The claims before the Tribunal were for unpaid wages for work in June 2024, July 2024, and 1-22 August 2024, unpaid annual leave, and notice pay. The judgment records that the relevant sums were payable by 5 September 2024. ACAS was contacted on 6 January 2025, an Early Conciliation certificate was issued on 8 January 2025, and the ET1 was presented on 10 January 2025.
The Tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for the claims to have been presented in time. Because they were not, the Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider them and dismissed the claims.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unpaid wages for work in June 2024, July 2024, and 1-22 August 2024, said to be payable by 5 September 2024. The Claimants (1)-(3) accepted the claim was not presented in time; the Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it in time and dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for unpaid annual leave, said to be payable by 5 September 2024. The Tribunal found it was not presented in time, it was reasonably practicable to present it in time, and dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for notice pay, said to be payable by 5 September 2024. The Tribunal found it was not presented in time, it was reasonably practicable to present it in time, and dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction. | 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.