Case 3321108/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Hutchison v Trattoria Investments Limited and 2 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 3321108/2021
- Decision date
- 22 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maxwell Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr A Hutchison
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Watford on 28 March 2023, Employment Judge Maxwell found that Mr A Hutchison's claims succeeded against Trattoria Investments Limited, the first respondent. The tribunal awarded him damages for breach of contract in respect of unpaid expenses in the sum of £17,810.98.
On the unlawful deductions claim, the tribunal awarded £20,000 for the service charge said to be due at £1,000 per month from October 2019 to May 2021, £1,400 for the shortfall in two months when he was paid £1,300 rather than £2,000, and £1,000 for unpaid basic pay in the notice period. It also awarded £880.21 for accrued untaken annual leave and £3,000, described as four weeks' pay, for the lack of written employment particulars.
The claims against the second and third respondents, Demetris Demitriou and Andreas Demetriou, were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Awarded for unpaid expenses against the first respondent. | Upheld | — | £17,811 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Included £20,000 service charge due at £1,000 per month from October 2019 to May 2021, £1,400 for two months where basic pay was £1,300 rather than £2,000, and £1,000 unpaid basic pay in the notice period. | Upheld | — | £22,400 |
| Holiday pay | Award for accrued untaken annual leave. | Upheld | — | £880 |
| Other | Award of four weeks' pay for lack of written employment particulars. | Upheld | — | £3,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £44,091
- 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.