Case 2402492/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Skladany v South Manny Flavaz Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2402492/2022
- Decision date
- 4 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Skladany
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. It therefore determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 without a hearing, and cancelled the hearing listed for 13 July 2022.
The only substantive claim recorded in the judgment was for unauthorised deduction from wages. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered South Manny Flavaz Ltd to pay the claimant the gross sum of £332.84.
The written record did not set out any further factual findings, split the award into separate heads of loss, or record any additional remedy beyond the gross wage deduction award. The attached interest notice stated the relevant judgment day as 4 July 2022 and explained the statutory interest regime, but no separate interest amount was included in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent did not present a valid response on time. The tribunal determined the claim under rule 21 and found an unauthorised deduction from wages, ordering payment of the gross sum. | Upheld | — | £333 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £333
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21 of the 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.