Case 2303075/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Marmura v Logistics (Brighton) Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2303075/2022
- Decision date
- 29 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Marmura
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was determined under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because the respondent failed to present a valid response in time. The Employment Judge decided that judgment could properly be entered on the claim, or part of it, on that basis.
The tribunal found that Logistics (Brighton) Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £1,026.77 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to provide particulars of employment and ordered a further payment of £1,044.86.
The total award was £2,071.63. The hearing listed for 17 March 2023 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages and must pay £1,026.77 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,027 |
| Other | The judgment states the respondent failed to provide particulars of employment. The amount appears in the extracted text as '£1.044,86'; this is read as £1,044.86 because the total awarded is £2,071.63. | Upheld | — | £1,045 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,072
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.