Case 6011883/2025 · Employment Tribunal
O Gazit Shalev v Selina Management Company UK Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6011883/2025
- Decision date
- 7 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
O Gazit Shalev
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Watford Employment Tribunal on 7 April 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined that the claim could properly be decided under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages between July and September 2023 and ordered payment of £20,192 gross in respect of those deductions. The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered the respondent to pay damages of £4,539.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant a total of £24,731.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions from wages between July and September 2023; award stated as gross. | Upheld | — | £20,192 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £4,539 ordered. | Upheld | — | £4,539 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £24,731
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.