Case 3203024/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Nenov v The Ryan Anothony Group International Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3203024/2019
- Decision date
- 8 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Nenov
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, in a Rule 21 judgment, found that the Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,116.00. It also found that the Claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice entitlement under section 86(1)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and awarded damages of £535.38.
The tribunal further found that the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant's accrued and outstanding holiday entitlement on termination. It held that 8 days' holiday remained due and ordered payment of £816.00. The hearing listed for 8 April 2020 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,116 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes the claim as dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice under s.86(1)(a) ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £535 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found 8 days' holiday entitlement had accrued and remained outstanding on termination. | Upheld | — | £816 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,467
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.86(1)(a) ERA 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.