Case 3200685/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Matuzeviciute v Randstad Solutions Ltd and 1 other — 2019
- Case reference
- 3200685/2019
- Decision date
- 25 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms R Matuzeviciute
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal amended the names of the first and second respondents to Randstad Solutions Limited and OSR Recruitment Services Limited respectively.
The claim related to a possible transfer of undertakings between the second and first respondent on 6 January 2019, and to payment of accrued holiday pay and unpaid wages before 7 January 2019. The judgment records that the claimant settled the claims by COT3 on 22 August 2019, withdrew them by correspondence on 5 September 2019, and that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The claim related to a possible transfer of undertakings between the respondents on 6 January 2019. The judgment states the claims were settled by COT3 on 22 August 2019, withdrawn by correspondence on 5 September 2019, and dismissed following withdrawal. | Settled | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim included payment of accrued holiday pay prior to 7 January 2019. The judgment states the claims were settled by COT3 on 22 August 2019, withdrawn by correspondence on 5 September 2019, and dismissed following withdrawal. | Settled | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim included unpaid wages prior to 7 January 2019. The judgment states the claims were settled by COT3 on 22 August 2019, withdrawn by correspondence on 5 September 2019, and dismissed following withdrawal. | 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.