Case 2300620/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N SEMERTZIS v Regency Site Personnel Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2300620/2022
- Decision date
- 29 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Siddall Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N SEMERTZIS
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the London South Employment Tribunals on 17 February 2022 against Regency Site Personnel Limited (In Voluntary Liquidation). The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Siddall decided that the claim could properly be determined 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. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £3,078 gross.
The judgment states that the respondent must pay the claimant £3,078 in total. No separate breakdown of the award is given beyond that total.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined under rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £3,078 gross. | Upheld | — | £3,078 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,078
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.