Case 6042025/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Christopoulos v DBX Commodities Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6042025/2025
- Decision date
- 6 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mclaren Representation
- Venue
- London South Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Christopoulos
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant's claims for unpaid commission re Welhunt and unpaid commission re Uniper did not succeed. It also recorded that the claims for unpaid commission re Ember and underpayment of salary from October to December 2025 succeeded.
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 | Claim for unpaid commission re Welhunt. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unpaid commission re Uniper. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unpaid commission re Ember; award calculated on a gross basis. | Upheld | — | £4,566 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for underpayment of salary from October to December 2025; award calculated on a gross basis. | Upheld | — | £6,450 |
| Holiday pay | Claim for failure to pay accrued holiday pay for the holiday year 2025 succeeded; the tribunal found the claimant entitled to 7 days' holiday pay, with the award calculated on a gross basis. | Upheld | — | £2,692 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,708
- 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.