Case 6009530/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Rouizi v Chip Shop SE1 Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6009530/2024
- Decision date
- 7 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Corrigan Appearances
- Venue
- London South ET
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Rouizi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr A Rouizi, brought a complaint against Chip Shop SE1 Ltd that was heard by Employment Judge Corrigan at London South Employment Tribunal by video on 31 January 2025. The claimant appeared in person; the respondent did not appear and had entered no response.
The tribunal found the complaint of unlawful deduction of wages well-founded. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £1,714.23, subject to the appropriate deductions for tax and national insurance. The judgment records that this sum comprises £147 in unpaid wages and £1,567.23 in unpaid holiday pay.
The written record states that written reasons will not be provided unless requested by either party within 14 days. The judgment was approved on 31 January 2025 and sent to the parties on 7 March 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment records £147 as unpaid wages, payable subject to tax and NI deductions. | Upheld | — | £147 |
| Holiday pay | Judgment records £1,567.23 as unpaid holiday pay, included within the total £1,714.23 award; payable subject to tax and NI. | Upheld | — | £1,567 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,714
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.