Case 2300559/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Y Yosof v Young London Today — 2023
- Case reference
- 2300559/2023
- Decision date
- 31 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Andrews Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Y Yosof
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 6 February 2023 and the respondent did not present a valid response in time. The Employment Judge therefore decided that a determination could properly be made under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages for May, in the sum of £1,206.40, and June, in the sum of £1,794.30. The judgment records that the respondent must pay the claimant £3,000.46 gross.
The judgment also states that the respondent must pay the claimant £3,000.70 gross in total. The extracted text does not explain the relationship between the £3,000.46 figure and the £3,000.70 total. The claimant was held responsible for any sums owed to HMRC in respect of tax or national insurance contributions, and the hearing listed for 11 September 2023 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so the tribunal made a Rule 21 determination. The judgment finds unauthorised deductions from wages for May (£1,206.40) and June (£1,794.30). It records that the respondent must pay £3,000.46 gross and also states a total of £3,000.70 gross; the extracted text does not explain the difference between those figures. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,001
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.