Case 6031524/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Jose Carlos Martins Goncalves v Paul Richard Didd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6031524/2025
- Decision date
- 23 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tueje REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Jose Carlos Martins Goncalves
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant brought a complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages against the Respondent (an individual, Mr Paul Richard Didd). The hearing was held by CVP at London South on 23 February 2026 before Employment Judge Tueje sitting alone, with the Claimant unrepresented and the Respondent not in attendance.
The Tribunal found the complaint to be well-founded. The Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant's wages in respect of work undertaken between November 2024 and June 2025.
The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant £3,460.00, being the gross sum deducted, with the Claimant responsible for any tax or National Insurance. Reasons were given orally; written reasons were not provided in the published judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages between November 2024 and June 2025; £3,460.00 gross awarded. Claimant responsible for tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £3,460 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,460
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.