Case 6003784/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Max Damsell v Woodland & Sea Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003784/2025
- Decision date
- 21 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Elizabeth Gibson
- Venue
- By CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Max Damsell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Elizabeth Gibson, sitting alone by CVP on 21 November 2025, considered Mr Max Damsell's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages against Woodland & Sea Limited. The Claimant appeared in person and the Respondent was represented by its director, Mr Raymondo Ferrezzano.
The Tribunal found that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded. It held that the Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant's wages in the period 1 December to 21 December 2024.
The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant £1,273.96, being the gross sum deducted, with the Claimant responsible for any tax or National Insurance. Reasons were given orally at the hearing; written reasons were not provided in the record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded for the period 1 to 21 December 2024; the Respondent was ordered to pay the gross sum deducted. | Upheld | — | £1,274 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,274
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.