Case 3322523/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Cati v Alevri Etc Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3322523/2021
- Decision date
- 16 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Cati
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Watford by video on 16 November 2022, Employment Judge R Lewis recorded a judgment by consent between Mrs A Cati and Alevri Etc Limited. The respondent was ordered to pay arrears of pay of £2,600, calculated as 292 hours at £8.91 per hour, and holiday pay of £1,200, calculated as 135 hours at £8.91 per hour.
The judgment states that the total payable was £3,800 gross. It also recorded that the respondent could comply by deducting and paying tax and national insurance and paying the balance to the claimant, provided it gave written confirmation that it had paid those sums; if it failed to provide that confirmation, the entire sum would remain due and payable to the claimant.
No written reasons were provided because the reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record is limited to the consent orders and payment terms.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | By consent the respondent was ordered to pay arrears of pay of £2,600.00, calculated as 292 hours at £8.91 per hour. The judgment states all figures are gross. | Settled | — | £2,600 |
| Holiday pay | By consent the respondent was ordered to pay holiday pay of £1,200.00, calculated as 135 hours at £8.91 per hour. The judgment states all figures are gross. | Settled | — | £1,200 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,800
- 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.