Case 2206598/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Stankevitch v Capital Assets Partners Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2206598/2020
- Decision date
- 2 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Stankevitch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not file an ET3 Grounds of Resistance. Regional Employment Judge Wade therefore determined the claim on the papers under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, without a hearing.
The tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages to Mr J Stankevitch. It ordered the respondent to pay 1.25 months' pay for the period before the factory was shut and the employment terminated, in the sum of £3,250 net, and to account to HMRC for the tax and NI due.
The tribunal also recorded that the respondent's failure to pay wages had resulted in the claimant sustaining financial loss within Employment Rights Act 1996 section 24(2), and ordered payment of a further £2,775. The judgment does not apportion the sums between separate causes of action beyond those two awards, and no other remedy is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment on the papers after the respondent failed to file an ET3. The tribunal found the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages, awarded 1.25 months' pay of £3,250 net for the period before the factory was shut and the employment terminated, and separately awarded £2,775 for financial loss under ERA 1996 s.24(2). The tribunal also ordered the respondent to account to HMRC for tax and NI due. | Upheld | — | £6,025 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,025
- 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.