Case 2203852/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Ricardo Dourado v Wright Family Office Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2203852/2023
- Decision date
- 2 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Ricardo Dourado
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningRespondent Wright Family Office Ltd did not file an ET3. Employment Judge E Burns therefore determined the claim on the papers under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, without a hearing. The hearing listed for 5 June 2023 was cancelled and the parties were told not to attend.
On the ET1, the tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages of £7,987.18, had failed to pay holiday pay of £1,346.15, and had failed to pay the claimant £6,923.08 in respect of notice. The tribunal ordered payment of £16,256.41 in total and directed the respondent to account to HMRC for any tax and NI due on that sum.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages in this amount. | Upheld | — | £7,987 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal separately found holiday pay was unpaid in this amount. | Upheld | — | £1,346 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records this sum as due 'in respect of notice' and does not label it further. | Upheld | — | £6,923 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,256
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.