Case 2203881/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Saridja v Thompson Crosby & Co Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2203881/2021
- Decision date
- 25 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Saridja
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the claim on the papers under rule 21 because the respondent had not filed an ET3 Grounds of Resistance. Having considered the ET1, Regional Employment Judge Wade determined that the claim could properly be decided without a hearing.
The only substantive finding recorded is that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages to Mr M Saridja. The judgment does not set out any disputed factual background or separate any part of the sum into distinct heads of loss.
The tribunal ordered Thompson Crosby & Co Ltd to pay £9,926.90 and to account to HMRC for any tax and national insurance due. No other remedy components are identified in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment. The respondent did not file an ET3 Grounds of Resistance. The tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages and ordered payment of £9,926.90, with the respondent to account to HMRC for any tax and national insurance due. | Upheld | — | £9,927 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,927
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21 Employment Tribunal Rules 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.