Case 2300973/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Eppinger v Lionceaux LLP — 2022
- Case reference
- 2300973/2022
- Decision date
- 16 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Eppinger
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 15 March 2022. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Ferguson decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £2,019.24 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £632.69.
The judgment records a total sum due to the claimant of £2,651.93. No separate findings on compensation, interest, or other remedy components are set out in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined on a rule 21 basis after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | £2,019 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It does not further specify the statutory or contractual basis. | Upheld | — | £633 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,652
- 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.