Case 2418138/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr O Romain v Itenuk Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2418138/2018
- Decision date
- 11 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Parkin REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr O Romain
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was disposed of at a hearing before Regional Employment Judge Parkin on 22 August 2019. The judgment records that, by consent and in full settlement of the claim, the respondent, Itenuk Limited, was to pay the claimant, Mr O Romain, £710.00 net by 6 September 2019.
The judgment does not contain findings on liability, and it does not set out a split between different heads of loss or any separate remedy components. It is therefore recorded as a settlement of the claim rather than a substantive upheld or dismissed determination.
The accompanying notice on interest explains the operation of the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 and states the relevant decision day as 11 September 2019 and the calculation day as 12 September 2019, with the stipulated interest rate at 8%. The judgment itself does not award a separate interest figure.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that, by consent and in full settlement of the claim, the respondent was to pay £710.00 net to the claimant by 6 September 2019. The judgment does not break down the amount further. | Settled | — | £710 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £710
- 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.