Case 3303821/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Tribunal upholds unlawful-deduction-from-wages and breach-of-contract claims against Menachem Roitenbarg
The tribunal recorded that the respondent had failed to enter a response, and on that basis the claims for breach of contract and unlawful deduction from wages succeeded. The judgment did not determine remedy.
- Case reference
- 3303821/2019
- Decision date
- 26 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Henry Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Ronen Mr M Weinberger Mr A Jandaoui
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in case numbers 3303821/2019 and 3303823/2019. The tribunal recorded that the respondent had failed to enter a response, and on that basis the claims for breach of contract and unlawful deduction from wages succeeded.
The judgment did not determine remedy. It states that the issue of remedy would be determined at a hearing, and that a notice of that hearing would be sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Judgment entered under Rule 21 after the Respondent failed to present a response; remedy to be determined at a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment entered under Rule 21 after the Respondent failed to present a response; remedy to be determined at a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.