Case 3315876/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D D’Souza v Jungs Eton Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 3315876/2019
- Decision date
- 3 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D D’Souza
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not enter a response. Under Rule 21(2) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, Employment Judge R Lewis found the claimant's claims to be well founded on the papers. The claims identified in the judgment were breach of contract, holiday pay, wages, written terms of conditions, and a written statement of reasons for dismissal.
The judgment did not assess liability in a contested hearing or set out detailed findings of fact beyond the Rule 21 default judgment. It also did not determine remedy. The tribunal stated that remedy would be decided at a hearing listed for 10 March 2020.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Found well founded under Rule 21(2) after the respondent failed to enter a response. Remedy was not determined in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Found well founded under Rule 21(2) after the respondent failed to enter a response. Remedy was not determined in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records a claim for wages as well founded under Rule 21(2) after the respondent failed to enter a response. Remedy was not determined in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The judgment records a claim for written terms of conditions as well founded under Rule 21(2) after the respondent failed to enter a response. Remedy was not determined in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The judgment records a claim for a written statement of reasons for dismissal as well founded under Rule 21(2) after the respondent failed to enter a response. Remedy was not determined in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21(2) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.