Case 6022813/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Vaiva Navickaite v French Sole Wholesale Limited (as amended) — 2025
- Case reference
- 6022813/2024
- Decision date
- 21 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bunting Appearances
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Vaiva Navickaite
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningVaiva Navickaite was employed by the legal entity identified by the tribunal as company number 12091982, which had originally traded as French Sole Wholesale Ltd and later changed its name to French Sole Ltd. Her employment ended on 6 September 2024. She had received a payslip for the final period but was not paid £1,368.87 for that period.
The respondent did not present a defence and did not attend the hearing. The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that the sum remained owing. It also dealt with the respondent identity issue by finding that, although the September 2024 payslip was in the name French Sole Ltd, the claimant remained employed by the same legal entity that had employed her originally, namely company number 12091982.
The tribunal found the unpaid wages claim well founded and ordered the respondent to pay £1,368.87, less any required deductions for which it should account to HMRC, within 14 days of the judgment being sent to the parties. The reasons also recorded the name changes affecting company number 12091982 and noted that a different related company, FS (Maddox) Ltd, was in liquidation.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal described the claim as one for unpaid wages and ordered payment of £1,368.87 less any required deductions to HMRC. | Upheld | — | £1,369 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,369
- 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.