Case 3200196/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Z Belevica v OSR Recruitment Services Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3200196/2019
- Decision date
- 27 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Z Belevica
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal amended the name of the Respondent from OSR Services Ltd to OSR Recruitment Services Limited. The judgment recorded that the claim related to a possible transfer of undertakings between the Respondent and Randstad Solutions Limited on 6 January 2019, and to payment of accrued holiday pay and unpaid wages before 7 January 2019.
The judgment stated that the Claimant had settled these claims, and any related claims against Randstad Solutions Limited, by way of COT3. The Claimant then withdrew her claims by correspondence to the Tribunal on 13 September 2019. The proceedings were dismissed following that withdrawal.
No monetary award or remedy breakdown was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The judgment says the claim related to a possible transfer of undertakings between the Respondent and Randstad Solutions Limited on 6 January 2019, was settled by COT3, withdrawn by correspondence on 13 September 2019, and the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal. | Settled | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment identifies a claim for accrued holiday pay prior to 7 January 2019; it says the claims were settled by COT3, withdrawn, and then dismissed. | Settled | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment identifies a claim for unpaid wages prior to 7 January 2019; it says the claims were settled by COT3, withdrawn, and then dismissed. | Settled | — | — |
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.