Case 6023527/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Marco Beschizza v Just the Tipple Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6023527/2024
- Decision date
- 19 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lumby REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Marco Beschizza
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Croydon by CVP on 15 May 2025, before Employment Judge Lumby sitting alone, the tribunal dealt with two wage-related complaints brought by Mr Marco Beschizza against Just the Tipple Ltd. The complaint of unpaid overtime was dismissed.
The holiday pay complaint was found well-founded. The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay the claimant for holidays that had accrued but not been taken when his employment ended. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £2,525.48, and recorded that the claimant is responsible for any tax and National Insurance due on that sum.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint of unpaid overtime was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the holiday pay complaint well-founded because the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay for holidays accrued but not taken when employment ended. | Upheld | — | £2,525 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,525
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.