Case 3310708/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Difranco v J.U.T.A Services - James Green — 2025
- Case reference
- 3310708/2024
- Decision date
- 16 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchings
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Difranco
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr J Difranco, presented his claim on 14 November 2024. The respondent, J.U.T.A Services - James Green, failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined that the claim could properly be decided under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure.
On the merits recorded in the judgment, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £2,801.29 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £308.50.
The judgment does not record any discrimination, dismissal, or other claims, and it does not set out any additional remedy components beyond the two sums awarded for wages and holiday pay. The total recorded award is £3,109.79.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,801 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £309 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,110
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.