Case 6016509/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Nzegwu v The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead and 2 others — 2025
- Case reference
- 6016509/2025
- Decision date
- 8 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr T Nzegwu
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr T Nzegwu presented his claim in the South East Employment Tribunal on 7 May 2025. Big Fish Group, the third respondent, failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Tynan decided that the claim against it could properly be determined under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.
The tribunal found that Big Fish Group had made unauthorised deductions from Mr Nzegwu’s wages and ordered it to pay him £2,453 gross. The judgment recorded no outcome against the other respondents, The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead and Vivid Resourcing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The finding and payment order apply to Big Fish Group, the third respondent. The award is gross. | Upheld | — | £2,453 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,453
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.