Case 2409210/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Zebbes v Akasya — 2022
- Case reference
- 2409210/2021
- Decision date
- 7 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Zebbes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Manchester Employment Tribunals on 19 August 2021. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined that a decision could properly be made under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On the substance of the claim, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages. The judgment ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £3,640 gross. The judgment also included the standard tribunal interest notice, stating that the relevant judgment day was 7 January 2022, the calculation day was 8 January 2022, and the stipulated rate of interest was 8%, but it did not specify any separate interest sum 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. Under rule 21, the Employment Judge determined the claim on the papers and found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages. | Upheld | — | £3,640 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,640
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.