Case 6020952/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Erikas Beloziorovas v Rotav Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6020952/2025
- Decision date
- 6 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Erikas Beloziorovas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr Erikas Beloziorovas had established his claims for a shortfall of wages in March 2025 and for unpaid accrued holiday pay, with the holiday pay limited to the period January 2025 to March 2025. The tribunal accepted the wage shortfall at £297 and the holiday pay claim at £1,009.40.
The tribunal also found that Rotav Ltd had failed to provide the claimant with a written contract of employment. For that failure, it ordered the respondent to pay 4 weeks' pay pursuant to section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, calculated using the capped weekly rate of £700, giving an award of £2,800.
The total sum ordered to be paid for the successful claims was £4,106.40, made up of £297.00 for the March 2025 wage shortfall, £1,009.40 for unpaid holiday pay, and £2,800.00 for the section 38 award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Shortfall of wages in March 2025. | Upheld | — | £297 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid accrued holiday pay limited to the period January 2025 to March 2025. | Upheld | — | £1,009 |
| Other | Award of 4 weeks' pay, capped at £700 per week, for failure to provide a written contract of employment pursuant to section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £2,800 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,106
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 38 of the Employment Act 2002
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.