Case 3302249/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Seguinot v Bud Rescue & Recovery Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3302249/2025
- Decision date
- 28 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Seguinot
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the South East Employment Tribunal on 17 February 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Anstis determined the claim under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure without a contested hearing.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,350.00 gross. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and ordered damages of £1,215.36. The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £403.50.
The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Anstis on 11 November 2025 and sent to the parties on 28 November 2025.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded £1,350.00 gross for unauthorised deductions from wages. Rule 22 determination after respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | £1,350 |
| Breach of contract | Damages of £1,215.36 for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £1,215 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday entitlement of £403.50 awarded. Listed under Working Time Regulations on gov.uk; characterised here as holiday_pay. | Upheld | — | £404 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,969
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.