Case 2404758/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr O Ayeni v RHF Health Solution Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2404758/2019
- Decision date
- 20 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter JUDGEMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr O Ayeni
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting before Employment Judge Shotter on 31 July 2019, held that Mr O Ayeni was entitled to be paid his outstanding pay. That part of his unlawful deduction from wages claim was well-founded, and by agreement the respondent, RHF Health Solution Ltd, was ordered to pay him the gross sum of £984.00, subject to lawful deductions of tax and national insurance to be calculated by the respondent's accountant.
The tribunal also dealt with the claimant's separate complaint about an unpaid bonus. It found that he was not entitled to a bonus payment, so the unlawful deduction claim in respect of bonus was not well-founded and was dismissed. No other remedy was recorded in the judgment beyond the £984 gross award for outstanding pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to be paid his outstanding pay. By agreement between the parties, the respondent was ordered to pay the gross sum of £984.00, subject to lawful deduction of tax and national insurance to be calculated by the respondent's accountant. | Upheld | — | £984 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant was not entitled to a bonus payment and dismissed the unlawful deduction claim so far as it related to unpaid bonus. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £984
- across all upheld claims
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.