Case 2200490/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Selevic v Kitchen Labs Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2200490/2024
- Decision date
- 18 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Keogh Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Selevic
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London Central Employment Tribunal on 14 January 2024. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Keogh determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that Kitchen Labs Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages between 23 October 2023 and 12 November 2023, including a fully worked notice period. It calculated 78.72 hours at £15.50 per hour and ordered payment of £1,220.16 gross.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement. It calculated 83.26 hours at £15.50 per hour and ordered payment of £1,290.53 gross. The tribunal stated that no deductions were required in respect of benefits received because the sums claimed were owed for periods worked and holidays accrued as at the date of termination.
The total gross amount payable was £2,510.69.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages for 78.72 hours at £15.50 per hour during 23 October 2023 to 12 November 2023, including a fully worked notice period. | Upheld | — | £1,220 |
| Holiday pay | Determined under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The tribunal found unpaid holiday entitlement for 83.26 hours at £15.50 per hour, accrued as at termination. | Upheld | — | £1,291 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,511
- 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.