Case 4102359/2020 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102359/2020 Mr M Dima v RoseWorkforceSolutions — 2020
- Case reference
- 4102359/2020
- Decision date
- 30 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge David Hoey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102359/2020 Mr M Dima
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim, so Employment Judge David Hoey issued judgment on the available material under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 on 30 June 2020.
The tribunal found that RoseWorkforceSolutions had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr M Dima's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay £1,076.04 in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also recorded that the claim in relation to section 38 of the ERA 2002 succeeded and made an award of £1,536.64. The judgment does not break down that award further. The total amount awarded by the judgment is £2,612.68.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,076.04. | Upheld | — | £1,076 |
| Other | The tribunal said the claim in relation to section 38 of the ERA 2002 succeeded and made an award of £1,536.64. | Upheld | — | £1,537 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,613
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.