Case 3302175/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Mihai v Northwood Coachworks Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3302175/2020
- Decision date
- 16 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Mihai
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a Rule 21 default judgment in favour of Mr I Mihai against Northwood Coachworks Ltd. The Tribunal recorded that the Respondent failed to enter a response and, under Rule 21(2) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, found the claimant's claims succeed.
The judgment does not set out separate factual findings on the underlying claims or identify a split between them. It simply orders the Respondent to pay the Claimant £900.00. No separate remedy breakdown is given in the text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that, because the respondent failed to enter a response, the Tribunal found the claimant's claims succeed. The £900 award is not split between claims in the text. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that, because the respondent failed to enter a response, the Tribunal found the claimant's claims succeed. The £900 award is not split between claims in the text. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £900
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21(2) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.