Case 2303154/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Kastrinakis v Ocean Lounge — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303154/2022
- Decision date
- 19 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Khalil
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Kastrinakis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 6 September 2022 and the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Khalil therefore determined the claim 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 and ordered payment of £605.00 gross.
The claimant also pursued an unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment records that section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years’ service to bring such a claim, subject to exceptions that did not apply here. The claimant had less than two years’ service, and the tribunal noted that no acceptable reason had been given why the complaint should not be struck out. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore struck out.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £605.00 gross. | Upheld | — | £605 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal recorded that the claimant had less than two years’ service, no exception under section 108 ERA 1996 applied, and no acceptable reason was given to avoid strike-out. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £605
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.