Case 6022699/2025 · Employment Tribunal
M Oni v TCES Care Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6022699/2025
- Decision date
- 28 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lumby Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
M Oni
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the London South Employment Tribunal on 18 June 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Lumby determined that the claim could properly be decided in accordance with rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1091.42 gross. It further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £994.36 gross, giving a total sum payable of £2085.78. The hearing listed for 13 October 2025 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21/22 determination following respondent's failure to present a valid response in time. Award of £1091.42 gross for unauthorised deductions from wages. | Upheld | — | £1,091 |
| Holiday pay | Award of £994.36 gross for unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £994 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,086
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.