Case 3303056/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Dacian Petru Sighete v Go Resource Management Group Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3303056/2023
- Decision date
- 4 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Dacian Petru Sighete
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Laidler, sitting alone at Bury St Edmunds (CVP) on 11 March 2024, found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. The respondent did not enter a response and the claimant appeared in person.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the total sum of £3,131, calculated as the balance of wages due for three weekly periods in late October and November 2022: £555 for 31 October to 4 November 2022, £1,183 for 7 to 11 November 2022, and £1,393 for 14 to 18 November 2022.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing; written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The judgment was sent to the parties on 4 April 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Award comprised of unpaid wages for three weekly periods: 31 October – 4 November 2022 (£555), 7 – 11 November 2022 (£1,183) and 14 – 18 November 2022 (£1,393). Respondent did not enter a response. | Upheld | — | £3,131 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,131
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.