Case 3200747/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Yanni v Lovelock Taylour Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 3200747/2021
- Decision date
- 21 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Dempsey Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Yanni
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a telephone hearing on 21 June 2021 before Employment Judge O'Dempsey, with the claimant in person and the respondent not attending, the tribunal found that Mr J Yanni was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,421. It also declared unlawful deductions from wages in respect of his December 2020 pay in the sum of £182.35, and from pay for 1 January to 13 January 2021 in the sum of £2,127.60, calculated at a daily rate of £236.34.
The tribunal further declared unlawful deductions in respect of holiday pay in the sum of £3,781.44 relating to 15 days, including one day's accrued holiday pay. It also recorded a breach of contract for failure to pay statutory notice and stated that the claimant was entitled to four weeks' statutory minimum notice. The extracted text does not state a quantified amount for the notice pay or an overall total award.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Redundancy payment ordered in the sum of £2,421. | Upheld | — | £2,421 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unlawful deduction declared in respect of December 2020 pay. | Upheld | — | £182 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unlawful deduction declared in respect of pay for 1 January to 13 January 2021, calculated at a daily rate of £236.34. | Upheld | — | £2,128 |
| Holiday pay | Unlawful deduction declared in respect of holiday pay for 15 days, including one day's accrued holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £3,781 |
| Breach of contract | Payment ordered for breach of contract for failure to pay statutory notice; the extracted text states that the claimant was entitled to 4 weeks' statutory minimum notice but does not state a quantified sum. | Upheld | — | — |
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.