Case 2408734/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K O’Dowd v De Cuba Habana Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2408734/2020
- Decision date
- 8 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ross REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K O’Dowd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr K O'Dowd brought a claim described as unlawful deduction from wages and failure to pay accrued but untaken holidays on termination of employment against De Cuba Habana Limited. The Tribunal held that the claim was presented within the time limit and that it therefore had jurisdiction to hear the case.
The respondent failed to file a response and did not attend the hearing on 21 January 2021, which took place by CVP before Employment Judge Ross. The written judgment records that a judgment pursuant to rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 would be issued. Leave was also granted to amend the name of the respondent to De Cuba Habana Limited. The record does not set out any substantive merits determination or monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records a claim described as unlawful deduction from wages and failure to pay accrued but untaken holidays on termination of employment. It decides only that the claim was presented within time and that the Tribunal had jurisdiction; the supplied text does not set out any final merits outcome or award, and says a rule 21 judgment would be issued after the respondent failed to respond or attend. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21 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.