Case 6001928/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Matijevskis v Complete Logistics Group Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 6001928/2024
- Decision date
- 24 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Matijevskis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Midlands East Employment Tribunals on 24 April 2024. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined that a decision could properly be made on the claim, or part of it, under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £2,537.87 gross, calculated as £2,936.71 owed less £398.84 already paid. Future hearings were cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 determination after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Award is £2,936.71 owed less £398.84 already paid. | Upheld | — | £2,538 |
| Breach of contract | Listed on gov.uk under Breach of Contract, but the judgment text addresses only the unauthorised deductions from wages claim and does not separately adjudicate a breach of contract claim. Outcome unclear from the judgment text. | Other | — | — |
| Redundancy | Listed on gov.uk under Redundancy, but the judgment text does not separately address a redundancy pay claim. Outcome unclear from the judgment text. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,538
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 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.