Case 6026067/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Lucian Marius Puca v Spongie Hand Car Wash Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6026067/2025
- Decision date
- 26 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Benson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Lucian Marius Puca
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy consent, the tribunal found that the claimant's complaint in respect of holiday pay was well-founded. The respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages by failing to pay him for holidays accrued but not taken on the date his employment ended.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £700, with the claimant responsible for any tax or National Insurance due on that sum. The hearing previously listed for 26 January 2026 was cancelled in light of the consent judgment.
The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Benson on 2 December 2025 and sent to the parties on 12 January 2026. A standard notice under Article 12 of the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 was attached, identifying 12 January 2026 as the relevant decision day and 8% per annum as the stipulated rate of interest if the award is not paid within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Judgment by consent. The tribunal recorded the holiday pay complaint as well-founded and characterised the failure to pay accrued but untaken holiday on termination as an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £700 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £700
- 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.