Case 3305148/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr M Mehdi, Director — 2024
- Case reference
- 3305148/2023
- Decision date
- 7 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Ord Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Cambridge by CVP on 16 January 2024, Employment Judge M Ord heard the claim brought by Miss Ginatare Baltusyte against Lennox Auto Limited, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by its director, Mr M Mehdi. The tribunal gave oral judgment at the hearing, with the written record sent to the parties on 7 February 2024.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's claim for unlawful deductions from wages and found that £50.76 was due in respect of that claim. It also upheld the claimant's claim for unpaid accrued holiday pay and found that £106.15 was due.
The tribunal recorded that the total amount due to the claimant was £156.91, for which sum judgment was entered. No separate element for interest or any other head of loss was recorded in the written decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unlawful deductions from wages in the sum of £50.76. | Upheld | — | £51 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant was not paid accrued holiday pay in the sum of £106.15. | Upheld | — | £106 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £157
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.