Case 6015848/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Hans Johansson v Blackswan Technologies AI Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6015848/2024
- Decision date
- 19 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Liz Ord
- Venue
- Croydon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Hans Johansson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Croydon on 2 May 2025, Employment Judge Liz Ord found the claimant's complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages, consequential losses and unpaid expenses well-founded. The respondent did not appear. Oral reasons were given at the hearing.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £80,149.62. The judgment broke that sum down as £2,127.57 for part net salary outstanding from 1 July 2023 to 31 March 2024, £63,315.85 for full net salary outstanding from 1 April 2024 to 30 April 2025, £12,319.86 for employer pension contributions from May 2023 and from October 2023 to May 2025, £2,204.09 for consequential losses from the sale of shares due to lack of salary, and £182.25 for unpaid corporate expenses for laptop delivery.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment upheld an aggregate complaint covering unauthorised deductions from wages, consequential losses and unpaid expenses, but it did not allocate a separate award to each head. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £80,150
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.