Case 2305974/2024 · Employment Tribunal

Mr C Mistry v Mr R D Cafagna and 1 other — 2025

Case reference: 2305974/2024
Decision date: 3 April 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Ramsden Representation
Venue: London South

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

Mr C Mistry

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The Claimant presented his claim on 8 August 2024. The claim against the First Respondent was withdrawn and dismissed upon withdrawal. The Second Respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge decided the matter on the available material under Rule 22(2) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.

The tribunal found that the Claimant had been employed by the Second Respondent for just under four weeks, so his ordinary unfair dismissal complaint failed because he did not have the two years' service required by section 108 of the 1996 Act. It also upheld two complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages under section 13 of the 1996 Act: one for unpaid wages for work performed in June and July 2024, and one for deductions made for pension contributions that were not paid across to the pension scheme, valued at 5% of gross wages for the period 21 June 2024 to 17 July 2024.

The tribunal further found that the Claimant had been dismissed without notice or pay in lieu. It calculated one week's notice pay by reference to 21 hours a week at £8.70 per hour and awarded £182.70 for wrongful dismissal. Because the Claimant raised a grievance about unpaid wages and the Second Respondent did not act on it, the tribunal increased the awards by 25% under section 207A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. The total award was £1,083.06 gross.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Claim against the First Respondent was withdrawn and dismissed upon withdrawal; no substantive finding was made.	Withdrawn	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The Claimant had just under four weeks' service with the Second Respondent and did not meet the two-year qualifying period in section 108 of the 1996 Act.	Dismissed	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	Unpaid wages for work performed in June and July 2024; the tribunal found unauthorised deductions under section 13 of the 1996 Act.	Upheld	—	£650
Unlawful deduction from wages	Sums deducted from wages for pension contributions but not paid across to the pension scheme; the tribunal found an unauthorised deduction under section 13 of the 1996 Act. The value was 5% of gross wages for 21 June 2024 to 17 July 2024.	Upheld	—	£34
Wrongful dismissal	The Claimant was dismissed without notice or pay in lieu and was entitled to one week's notice at 21 hours per week and £8.70 per hour.	Upheld	—	£183

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £1,083; across all upheld claims

Legal tests applied

4 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 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.