Case 2200348/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Settembre90 Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2200348/2020
- Decision date
- 5 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkin JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not file an ET3 Grounds of Resistance. Employment Judge Adkin therefore determined the case under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 without a hearing, and the hearing listed for 6 May 2020 did not take place.
On the claim as presented, the tribunal held that the respondent unlawfully failed to pay wages to the claimant. It ordered payment of £3,447.88 in total, made up of £1,471.30 for unlawful deduction from wages, £247.77 under section 8 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for failure to provide an accurate pay statement in June 2019, £1,311.20 for failure to provide an initial statement of employment particulars, and £640.61 for unpaid holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996 claim for failure to provide an accurate pay statement in June 2019. | Upheld | — | £248 |
| Other | Claim for failure to provide an initial statement of employment particulars. | Upheld | — | £1,311 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £641 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,471 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,448
- 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.