Case 3307144/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs G Paduraru v LTS Cleaning Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 3307144/2023
- Decision date
- 3 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs G Paduraru
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Mrs G Paduraru against LTS Cleaning Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation). The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of £997.50 gross.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £157.50 in damages. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £108.99.
Finally, the tribunal awarded two weeks’ pay because the respondent had failed to supply written particulars of employment, and ordered a further £315.00. The judgment records no separate apportionment beyond these amounts, and no interest or other remedy is specified.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £997.50 gross. | Upheld | — | £998 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £157.50. | Upheld | — | £158 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered £108.99. | Upheld | — | £109 |
| Other | The tribunal awarded two weeks’ pay for failure to supply written particulars of employment and ordered a further £315.00. | Upheld | — | £315 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,579
- 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.