Case 6025313/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Predrag Milicevic v Intelligiants Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6025313/2025
- Decision date
- 24 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Warren
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Predrag Milicevic
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the South East Employment Tribunal on 7 July 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response in time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure on the available material.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £3,999.72 gross. It further found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £2,310, and that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement, awarding £924.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £7,233.72 in total. The judgment was approved by Employment Judge M Warren on 20 January 2026 and sent to the parties on 24 March 2026.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions from wages; £3,999.72 gross awarded (rounded to integer GBP). | Upheld | — | £3,999 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £2,310. | Upheld | — | £2,310 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay holiday entitlement; £924 awarded. Layer 1 listing referenced Working Time Regulations; the judgment characterises this as holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £924 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,233
- 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.