Mr I Buzea v T33 Holdings Ltd and Bahadir Telli: 1802081/2023
JUDGMENT
The complaint that the claimant was unfairly dismissed is struck out.REASONS
[2]Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have not less than two years’ service to make an unfair dismissal complaint.[3]The claimant was employed by the respondent for less than two years.[4]Therefore, the claimant is not entitled to bring such a complaint.[5]The claimant has failed to give an acceptable reason, despite being given the opportunity to do so, why the complaint should not be struck out.[6]Accordingly, the complaint of unfair dismissal is struck out. The claimant’s other complaints are not affected by this judgment. Employment Judge Rogerson Date: 1 June 2023[1]The claimant was, from 1 October 2021 until 24 March 2023 an employee of T33 Holdings Ltd (the first respondent).[2]The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages is well-founded. The first respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the period 1 October 2021 – 23 March 2023[3]The first respondent shall pay the claimant £26,888.52, which is the gross sum deducted. The claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or National Insurance.[4]The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay is well-founded.[5]The first respondent shall pay the claimant £987.23 as damages for breach of contract. This figure has been calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant will have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay.[6]The first respondent unreasonably failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015 and it is just and equitable to increase the compensatory award payable to the claimant by 25 % in accordance with s 207A Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Case number: 1802081/2023 1803264/2023 Act 1992. The respondent shall pay the claimant the additional sum of £6722.13[7]The first respondent has breached the rights of the claimant to not be subjected to unauthorised deductions for wages, to be paid his outstanding holiday pay and to have his grievances dealt with. Those breaches have one or more aggravating factors. The first respondent is ORDERED to pay a penalty to the Secretary of state of £17,298.94.[8]The claims against Bahadir Telli (2) are dismissed.[9]The first respondent’s counter claim for breach of contract is struck out under rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 on the ground that it is vexatious and has not been actively pursued.