Case 6036608/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Respondent — 2026
- Case reference
- 6036608/2025
- Decision date
- 21 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Comfort Representatives
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningFollowing a hearing on 13 April 2026, the Tribunal found Mr Volodymyr Husiev’s complaint of unlawful deductions from wages against Prompt Men Services Ltd (formerly V K Removals Ltd) well-founded and ordered the Respondent to pay £9,200. It also found his complaint of unpaid statutory holiday pay well-founded and awarded £4,964.61.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent had failed to provide statutory written particulars under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It awarded £1,601.68 under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. The complaint concerning payslip and P45 irregularities was also well-founded, but no separate financial award was made because the relevant sums had been addressed under other heads of claim.
The workplace pension auto-enrolment claim was dismissed because the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it; the judgment stated that any such complaint lies within the jurisdiction of the Pensions Ombudsman. The total award was £15,766.29. The sums were awarded gross, with any liability for income tax or National Insurance contributions resting with the Claimant.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £9,200 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid statutory holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £4,965 |
| Other | Failure to provide statutory written particulars under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996; award made under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £1,602 |
| Other | Payslip and P45 irregularities; no separate financial award was made because all relevant sums were addressed through other heads of claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Claim concerning failure to auto-enrol the Claimant into a workplace pension scheme. The Tribunal held that it lacked jurisdiction and stated that any such complaint falls within the jurisdiction of the Pensions Ombudsman. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £15,766
- 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.