Case 2601445/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Martin-Pecos v v FM Solutions Group Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2601445/2021
- Decision date
- 12 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Martin-Pecos v
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 9 June 2021. The respondent had entered voluntary liquidation and no longer resisted the claim, and the Employment Judge decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £3,291.08 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,035.58, making a total award of £4,326.66.
The claims of age discrimination and race discrimination were withdrawn and dismissed. The hearing listed for 1 February 2023 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages and must pay this gross sum. | Upheld | — | £3,291 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the respondent failed to pay holiday entitlement and must pay this sum. | Upheld | — | £1,036 |
| Age discrimination | The judgment states the age discrimination claim was withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states the race discrimination claim was withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,327
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 21
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.