Case 6000999/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Busby-Pelekanou v Queen's Hotel and Spa Limited (In Administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 6000999/2024
- Decision date
- 6 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Z Busby-Pelekanou
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Bristol Employment Tribunals on 12 March 2024. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. It awarded the claimant £11.07 gross for overtime owed.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It awarded damages of £9,000.00 for that breach. The total award was £20,070.00.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and awards £11.070 gross for overtime owed. | Upheld | — | £11 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awards damages of £9,000.00. | Upheld | — | £9,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £20,070
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21, 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.