Case 6008022/2024 · Employment Tribunal
L A Rolska v OBS Medics Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008022/2024
- Decision date
- 1 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
L A Rolska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Watford Employment Tribunal on 8 August 2024. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. The judgment records that this was a default determination on the papers rather than a contested liability hearing.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of a gross sum of £300, subject to tax and NI deductions. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of a gross sum of £1,262.53, also subject to tax and NI deductions.
On the notice claim, the tribunal found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract, but it did not award damages because she had mitigated her loss. The bottom-line amount ordered by the judgment was £1,562.53 gross.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of a gross sum of £300, subject to tax and NI deductions. | Upheld | — | £300 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of a gross sum of £1,262.53, subject to tax and NI deductions. | Upheld | — | £1,263 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, but no damages were awarded because she had mitigated her loss. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,563
- 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.