Case 2214133/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Juan Jose Herrera Casas v Citrus FM Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2214133/2023
- Decision date
- 12 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Juan Jose Herrera Casas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Respondent did not file an ET3, so Employment Judge E Burns considered the ET1 and determined the matter without a hearing under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The judgment records that the Claimant was Juan Jose Herrera Casas and the Respondent was Citrus FM Limited.
The tribunal found that the Respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages due to the Claimant in the sum of £478. The judgment notes that the Claimant received a payslip confirming he was owed £382.40, described as £478 less tax, but he received no payment.
The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant £478, less any deductions for tax and National Insurance due on that sum for which the Respondent must account to HMRC. No other claims or additional remedy components are recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined under Rule 21 because the Respondent did not file an ET3. The tribunal found the Respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages of £478; the Claimant had received a payslip showing £382.40 net but no payment. | Upheld | — | £478 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £478
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.