Mr R Thorne v Yusuf Ozdemir — 2024

Case reference: 2403565/2024
Decision date: 26 November 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Dunlop

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr R Thorne

Respondent

Yusuf Ozdemir

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. On the written material, the tribunal found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in March 2024, failed to pay accrued untaken annual leave entitlement of 12 days, and dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	Unauthorised deduction from wages in March 2024; ordered gross sum of £88.66.	Upheld	—	£89
Holiday pay	Unpaid accrued untaken annual leave entitlement of 12 days; ordered gross sum of £265.98.	Upheld	—	£266
Breach of contract	Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages calculated as 12 weeks' statutory notice at £88.66 per week and paid gross to reflect possible tax on Post Employment Notice Pay.	Upheld	—	£1,064
Redundancy	Tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to 1.5 weeks' pay for each full year worked (20 years) at £88.66 per week.	Upheld	—	£2,660

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £4,078; across all upheld claims

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.