Case 6044741/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Joseph Barsouna v Signorelli’s Deli Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6044741/2025
- Decision date
- 30 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Joseph Barsouna
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented on 3 December 2025. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Graham decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £2,667 gross. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £2,667.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered £1,150.77. The claim for a redundancy payment was refused because the claimant did not have two years' continuous employment with the respondent.
The judgment records a total sum payable of £6,484.77.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of £2,667 gross. | Upheld | — | £2,667 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £2,667. | Upheld | — | £2,667 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered £1,150.77. | Upheld | — | £1,151 |
| Redundancy | The redundancy payment claim was refused because the claimant did not have two years' continuous employment with the respondent. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,485
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the 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.