Case 2301843/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Kopti v Beautifully Made Foundation CIC — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301843/2023
- Decision date
- 12 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Kopti
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was decided under rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Wright Date proceeded to determine the claim on the papers and listed no hearing in the judgment. The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and awarded £7,204.19 gross for that head of claim.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £981.48 in damages. The judgment states that this was calculated using the statutory notice period of 4 weeks, reflecting the claimant’s 4 years and 7 months of employment. In addition, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and awarded £64.32.
The judgment records a total award of £8,249.87. It further states that £334.91 was treated as a proscribed element under the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996, because the claimant said he received that amount as Universal Credit during the 4-week notice period. The balance of £7,914.96 was stated to be immediately payable, subject to any DWP recoupment notice.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment; respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages. | Upheld | — | £7,204 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, calculated using a 4-week statutory notice period. | Upheld | — | £981 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded for unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £64 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,250
- 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.
- 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.