Case 2403537/2022 · Employment Tribunal
A Chikhi v Italian Catering Concept Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2403537/2022
- Decision date
- 10 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A Chikhi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the claim under rule 21 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge recorded that a determination could properly be made in accordance with rule 21, and the hearing listed for 10 August 2022 was cancelled.
On the merits recorded in the written judgment, the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. It ordered payment of £432.00, calculated as 36 hours at £12 per hour.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £489.00, described as statutory notice of one week. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered £1,102.88. The judgment does not record any separate split between heads of loss beyond those stated sums.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £432.00, described as 36 hours at £12 per hour. | Upheld | — | £432 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £489.00, described as statutory notice of 1 week. | Upheld | — | £489 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,102.88. | Upheld | — | £1,103 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,024
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21
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.