Case 3305517/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Rustean v K3 Business Technologies Ltd (in administration) — 2022
- Case reference
- 3305517/2020
- Decision date
- 9 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Hunt Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Rustean
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal upheld Mr G Rustean's complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages. It found the complaint well founded in respect of unpaid wages for 1 to 24 April 2020, one month's pay in lieu of notice and 5.5 days' accrued holiday pay. The gross sums awarded for those matters were £2,827.92, £3,584 and £648 respectively, with the claimant responsible for any income tax and employee national insurance contributions due.
The Tribunal also found that Mr Rustean had a right to a statutory redundancy payment and awarded £3,228. It further held that K3 Business Technologies Ltd was in breach of contract by failing to make the payments due for wages, notice pay and holiday pay, but made no further breach of contract award because those damages were combined with the unauthorised deduction award to avoid double compensation.
The unfair dismissal claim was well founded and the Tribunal held that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. Applying Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd [1987] IRLR 50, it made a 100% deduction and therefore no compensatory award. The basic award was reduced by the statutory redundancy payment already awarded, so no additional unfair dismissal award was made. The respondent was ordered to pay the awarded sums.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment recorded that the claimant had a right to a statutory redundancy payment and awarded £3,228. | Upheld | — | £3,228 |
| Breach of contract | The respondent was found to be in breach of contract in failing to make payments due for wages, notice pay and holiday pay, but no further award was made because damages were combined with the unauthorised deduction award to avoid double compensation. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was well founded, but a 100% Polkey deduction meant no compensatory award was made. The basic award was reduced by the statutory redundancy payment, so no further award was made. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment upheld an unauthorised deduction from wages complaint covering unpaid wages for 1 to 24 April 2020, one month's pay in lieu of notice and holiday pay, with gross sums of £2,827.92, £3,584 and £648 respectively. | Upheld | — | £7,060 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,388
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd [1987] IRLR 50
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.