Case 6041159/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Aloia v Kteooi Limited and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6041159/2025
- Decision date
- 7 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jenkins Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr P Aloia
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Wales Employment Tribunal on 7 November 2025 against KTEOOI Limited (First Respondent) and DOBLAY Cardiff Limited (Second Respondent). The Second Respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Jenkins determined the claim under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure on 2 March 2026.
The Tribunal found that the Second Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages (£2,700.00 gross) and had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement (£376.00). The Second Respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £3,076.00 in total. The claim against the First Respondent was dismissed on withdrawal. The hearing listed for 10 March 2026 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 22 default judgment against the Second Respondent (DOBLAY Cardiff Ltd). Unauthorised deductions from wages, gross. | Upheld | — | £2,700 |
| Holiday pay | Rule 22 default judgment against the Second Respondent. Unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £376 |
| Other | Claim against the First Respondent (KTEOOI Limited) dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,076
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 Employment Tribunal 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.