Case 2206591/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Alexandre v Como 1907 Ltd and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 2206591/2022
- Decision date
- 31 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr D Alexandre
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr D Alexandre, brought a complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages against Como 1907 Ltd and And Six Ltd. Neither respondent appeared or was represented at the hearing and neither had presented a response to the claim. The tribunal formally amended the claim form to name Como 1907 Ltd as First Respondent and And Six Ltd as Second Respondent.
The tribunal found the complaint well-founded under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 in respect of unpaid wages and compensation for annual leave entitlement outstanding on termination. It held the First and Second Respondents jointly and severally liable for the total sum owing, £2,484.33. The judgment note adds that income tax and national insurance contributions may be payable on the award, subject to the respondents making appropriate deductions and accounting for them to the proper authorities.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal described the claim as a complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996, in respect of unpaid wages and compensation for annual leave entitlement outstanding on termination. | Upheld | — | £2,484 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,484
- 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.