Case 2223320/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Stoica v 3D Personnel Limited and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 2223320/2024
- Decision date
- 20 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Smith
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr A Stoica
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in London Central on 14 February 2025, Employment Judge B Smith, sitting alone, determined the claimant's employment status for each respondent. The tribunal found that Mr A Stoica was not an employee or worker of 3D Personnel Limited at the relevant time, and the complaints of unauthorised deductions of wages and holiday pay against the first respondent were therefore dismissed.
The tribunal further found that Mr Stoica was an employee of S & S Consulting Services (UK) Limited. On that basis, the complaints of unauthorised deductions of wages and holiday pay against the second respondent were allowed to proceed. The second respondent's application to strike out the claim, alternatively for a deposit order, was refused. No merits decision or monetary award is recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed against the first respondent because the tribunal found the claimant was not an employee or worker of 3D Personnel Limited at the relevant time. The judgment records that the complaints against the second respondent would proceed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed against the first respondent because the tribunal found the claimant was not an employee or worker of 3D Personnel Limited at the relevant time. The judgment records that the complaints against the second respondent would proceed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.