Case 2603387/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Misiuda v Cleaner Communities Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2603387/2019
- Decision date
- 16 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Z Misiuda
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued by Employment Judge M Butler on 16 January 2020 in case 2603387/2019. The claimant was Mr Z Misiuda and the respondent was Cleaner Communities Ltd. The tribunal made no findings beyond the declarations and awards set out in the judgment template.
The tribunal upheld three monetary claims. It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £254.70. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £960.00 in damages. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,008.00.
The judgment did not record any findings on unfair dismissal beyond the notice-related breach of contract claim, and it did not set out any separate legal reasoning, test, or reduction of the awards. The total of the sums ordered is £2,222.70.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment; the tribunal ordered payment of the gross/net sum of £254.70. | Upheld | — | £255 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent had dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £960.00. | Upheld | — | £960 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,008.00. | Upheld | — | £1,008 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,223
- 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.
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.