Case 6029010/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Odum v Routd Software Technologies Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6029010/2025
- Decision date
- 28 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robinson Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Odum
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the Claimant's claim in relation to pension contributions was dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant.
The Tribunal dismissed the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages, finding it was not well-founded. It also dismissed the claim for notice pay, described in the judgment as constructive wrongful dismissal, finding that claim was not well-founded.
The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within the stated time limit.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that the claim in relation to pension contributions was dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a claim for unauthorised deductions from wages and states it was not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as a claim for notice pay (constructive wrongful dismissal) and states it was not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.