Case 2303632/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Nicoara v State K9 Security Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303632/2022
- Decision date
- 22 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Musgrave-Cohen Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Nicoara
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt London South Employment Tribunal by CVP video conference on 14 June 2023, Employment Judge Musgrave-Cohen found that Mr R Nicoara was a worker within the meaning of section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996. The Tribunal held that State K9 Security Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from wages by failing to pay the full amount due for work done between 30 August 2022 and 15 September 2022, and ordered payment of £2,830 as the total gross sum deducted.
The Tribunal also ordered additional compensation of £2,284, representing four weeks' pay under section 38 Employment Act 2002, because the Respondent had failed to provide a full and accurate written statement of employment particulars. The judgment records that, applying Walters t/a Rosewood v Barik, awards for unlawful deduction from wages are gross amounts which the Respondent can satisfy by paying the net amount to the claimant and any tax and national insurance due to HMRC.
The claim for unfair dismissal was dismissed because the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. The judgment therefore records two monetary awards for the wage deduction and section 38 matters, but no award on the unfair dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal found the Respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages by failing to pay the full amount due for work done between 30 August 2022 and 15 September 2022. | Upheld | — | £2,830 |
| Other | Additional compensation of four weeks' pay under section 38 Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide a full and accurate written statement of employment particulars. | Upheld | — | £2,284 |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,114
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- Walters t/a Rosewood v Barik
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.