Case 2300545/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Yuriy Savchuk (1) Daniel Brown (2) Abdellatif Boutra (3) v R.M.I. Property Maintenance Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2300545/2023
- Decision date
- 2 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Downs Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Yuriy Savchuk (1) Daniel Brown (2) Abdellatif Boutra (3)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Savchuk attended by CVP and gave evidence on oath. The tribunal found that he worked for R.M.I. Property Maintenance Ltd as a painter-decorator from 3 October 2022 until 4 November 2022, on an agreement to be paid £20 an hour or £160 a day, paid in arrears on Fridays. It accepted his account of the payment pattern and found that he worked a further week and a half without being paid in full.
On that basis, the tribunal held that Mr Savchuk had suffered an unlawful deduction from wages and that £1,000 was owed to him. It ordered the respondent to pay him £1,000.
Mr Brown did not appear, and the tribunal recorded that it had no details of his claim, so it dismissed his claim. Mr Boutra's claim was not determined at the hearing; the tribunal adjourned it off and directed him to provide a written explanation and calculation by 29 September 2023 so that it could be determined on the papers if appropriate.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that Mr Savchuk was employed as a painter-decorator from 3 October 2022 to 4 November 2022 on agreed rates of £20 an hour / £160 a day, and that he was owed £1,000 in unpaid wages. | Upheld | — | £1,000 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Mr Brown did not attend the hearing and the tribunal had no details of his claim, so it dismissed the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,000
- 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.