Case 2204864/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Geovanna Oliveira Almeida v Abasto Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2204864/2022
- Decision date
- 30 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Connolly Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Geovanna Oliveira Almeida
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judgment by consent in Ms Geovanna Oliveira Almeida’s case against Abasto Limited. The tribunal recorded that the correct name of the respondent was Abasto Limited and that the respondent would pay the claimant the gross sum of £340 in relation to the sums claimed in the case, with deductions for income tax and national insurance contributions if applicable.
The written judgment states that the proceedings were brought to an end by consent and that the claim was therefore dismissed. No substantive findings on liability were set out in the written record because the tribunal noted that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
On the face of the judgment, the only monetary figure recorded is the agreed gross payment of £340. The judgment does not break that figure into separate heads of loss or identify any additional remedy components.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment by consent records an agreed gross payment of £340 within 14 days and states that the claim is dismissed, bringing the proceedings to an end by consent. | Dismissed | — | £340 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £340
- 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.