Case 6023301/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. L S Rodrigues v Buzz Recruitment Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6023301/2024
- Decision date
- 26 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. L S Rodrigues
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the South East Employment Tribunal on 3 March 2025. The respondent, Buzz Recruitment Limited, did not present a valid response on time. On that basis, the Employment Judge determined that a decision could properly be made on the claim, or part of it, under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's entitlement to holiday pay. It ordered the respondent to pay Mr. L. S. Rodrigues £1,006.72, calculated gross of deductions for tax and national insurance.
The judgment also directed the respondent to account for tax to HM Revenue & Customs and to pay the claimant £1,006.72 less the amount of tax due on that sum. No other claim type or remedy was identified in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge made a determination under rule 22. The holiday pay award was stated as £1,006.72 gross, with the respondent also required to account for tax to HMRC and pay the claimant £1,006.72 less tax due. | Upheld | — | £1,007 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,007
- 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.