Case 3201139/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Y Bouaouni v Baang Limited and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 3201139/2023
- Decision date
- 17 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jones Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Y Bouaouni
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an undefended Rule 21 judgment. The claim was brought on 26 June 2023 and served on the 1st Respondent on 6 July 2023. No Response was received from either Respondent. The tribunal recorded that the Claimant, Mr Y Bouaouni, had been employed by the 1st Respondent from 1 February 2023 to 11 June 2023 and was an employee and worker at the relevant time.
The tribunal upheld the complaint of unlawful deduction of wages. It found that the 1st Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant’s wages totalling £8,052.08. The judgment identified the unpaid sums as £4,333.33 for April 2023, £3,318.75 for May 2023 and £400.00 for June 2023.
The tribunal ordered the 1st Respondent to pay the Claimant £8,052.08. The judgment does not record any separate award for compensation, interest, or any other remedy beyond the unpaid wages identified in the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint of unlawful deduction of wages was successful. The tribunal ordered the 1st Respondent to pay outstanding wages for April 2023 (£4,333.33), May 2023 (£3,318.75) and June 2023 (£400.00), totalling £8,052.08. | Upheld | — | £8,052 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,052
- 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.
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.