Case 6021793/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr S Lakovlev, Director — 2026
- Case reference
- 6021793/2024
- Decision date
- 26 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting at Cambridge before Employment Judge Tynan on 3 March 2026, considered Mr R Lapa's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages against Intteco Ltd. The Claimant appeared in person and the Respondent was represented by its director, Mr S Lakovlev.
The Tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages to be well-founded in respect of the period 1 April 2023 to 9 October 2024. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant the sum of £1,168.01 gross, with the Claimant to be responsible for any income tax or employee National Insurance contributions unless the parties agreed in writing that the Respondent would make such deductions at source.
Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing; written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No legal tests or authorities were cited in the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded in respect of the period 1 April 2023 to 9 October 2024. | Upheld | — | £1,168 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,168
- 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.