Case 2210422/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Kingsley Akele v Airnow Media Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2210422/2023
- Decision date
- 7 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Joffe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Kingsley Akele
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined under rule 21 because the respondent failed to file an ET3. Employment Judge Joffe decided the case could properly be determined without a hearing on the basis of the ET1 and the additional information supplied by the claimant.
The tribunal found that Airnow Media Limited had unlawfully failed to pay wages to Kingsley Akele in the sum of £5,165.93. No other claim type is identified in the judgment, and no separate legal test is set out beyond the rule 21 determination on the papers.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £5,165.93 to the claimant and to account to HMRC for any tax and NI due on that sum. The listed hearing on 7 September 2023 was vacated and the parties were told not to attend.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding 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 the sum of £5,165.93 and ordered payment of that amount, with tax and NIC treatment to be accounted for to HMRC. | Upheld | — | £5,166 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,166
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.