Case 2600310/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Cornel Deaconu v Tanber Solutions Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2600310/2021
- Decision date
- 22 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Cornel Deaconu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal first considered limitation. It accepted the redundancy payment claim although it had been presented outside the six-month period, finding it just and equitable to do so. It also extended time for the breach of contract, unlawful deduction from wages and holiday pay claims because it was not reasonably practicable for those complaints to have been presented in time.
The preliminary hearing was treated as a final hearing under Rule 48. The respondent had not filed an ET3 in time, and the tribunal entered judgment under Rule 21 on the basis of the claimant's ET1 and his oral evidence.
On the merits, the tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment. It also found that he was not given the statutory minimum notice, that two weeks' wages had been deducted without authorisation, and that his holiday entitlement had not been paid, and it made separate awards for each of those claims.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal accepted the redundancy payment claim out of time under section 164(2) ERA 1996 and upheld it. | Upheld | — | £1,566 |
| Breach of contract | Award described as damages for breach of contract for failure to give minimum notice of termination. | Upheld | — | £794 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction of two weeks' wages at £261.60 per week. | Upheld | — | £523 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £157 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,040
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 164(2) ERA 1996
- not reasonably practicable
- section 86 ERA 1996
- Rule 21 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 48 Employment Tribunal 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.