Case 6003330/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F P Moissinac v Nanoplexus Solutions Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003330/2025
- Decision date
- 23 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F P Moissinac
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr F P Moissinac was employed by Nanoplexus Solutions Limited from 1 March 2024 until his resignation on 31 October 2024 as a Principal Scientist. He brought claims for unauthorised deductions from wages, holiday pay, unpaid pension contributions, and notice pay after amending his claim. The hearing took place by CVP before Employment Judge Phil Allen sitting alone. The respondent had not filed a response, but its representative attended and made submissions.
The respondent's representative conceded the holiday pay, pension contribution, and notice pay claims in full, and the tribunal entered judgment by consent on those claims. The only live dispute concerned the unauthorised deductions claim: the respondent accepted a net figure of £18,384.73, while the claimant sought the gross amount. The tribunal found the respondent had not substantiated the proposed net payment or the asserted agreement with HMRC, and it awarded the gross sum of £21,708.32, subject to deductions for tax and national insurance before payment.
The tribunal refused the claimant's costs application of £4,438.02. It noted that costs in the Employment Tribunal are exceptional, considered the claimant's reliance on rule 74(4) and rule 74(2)(a), and found that those grounds were not made out. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the awarded sums within 14 days, with interest payable if payment was not made in time.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages from 30 March 2024 until October 2024 and awarded the gross sum sought, subject to deductions for tax and national insurance before payment. The respondent had conceded a lower net figure but could not substantiate it or the asserted agreement with HMRC. | Upheld | — | £21,708 |
| Holiday pay | Claim for accrued but untaken annual leave. The respondent conceded the claim in full and judgment was entered by consent. | Upheld | — | £2,221 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim relating to pension contributions. The respondent conceded the claim in full and judgment was entered by consent. | Upheld | — | £565 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim relating to notice pay, added by amendment. The respondent conceded the claim in full and judgment was entered by consent. | Upheld | — | £3,208 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £27,702
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 74(4)
- rule 74(2)(a)
- The Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, article 12
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.