Case 6002959/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Sasha Ruhomutally v Valcucine London Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002959/2025
- Decision date
- 6 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Keogh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Sasha Ruhomutally
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Keogh determined this claim under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024 without a hearing, after the Respondent failed to file an ET3. Considering the ET1, the Judge found that the claim could properly be determined on the papers.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages to the Claimant in the gross sum of £1,153.84, representing two weeks at £576.92 gross per week. The Tribunal also found the Claimant entitled to one day's holiday pay in the gross sum of £82.19, calculated as £576.92 x 52 / 365.
The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant the gross sum of £1,236.03, subject to deductions for tax and national insurance. The hearing listed for 13 June 2025 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Two weeks' unpaid wages at £576.92 gross per week. Determined under Rule 22 without a hearing after the Respondent failed to file an ET3. | Upheld | — | £1,154 |
| Holiday pay | One day's holiday pay calculated as £576.92 x 52 / 365. | Upheld | — | £82 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,236
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024
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.