Case 1304037/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A. Islam v Rajdoot Tandoori Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1304037/2018
- Decision date
- 18 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hindmarch Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A. Islam
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Birmingham on 14 November 2019 before Employment Judge Hindmarch. The claimant, Mr A. Islam, appeared in person and the respondent, Rajdoot Tandoori Limited, was represented by Mr Sanghera, HR Consultant.
The tribunal dismissed the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal as not well founded. It also dismissed the complaint of unlawful deduction from wages in respect of overtime hours as not well founded.
Two money claims succeeded. The complaint of failure to pay accrued but untaken holiday pay was upheld, and the tribunal awarded £1,005. The complaint of unlawful deductions from wages in respect of failure to pay the national minimum wage was also upheld, and £364 was awarded.
The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing, so no written reasons were provided in the decision record. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment is £1,369.
Claims and outcomes
4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,005 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint in respect of overtime hours. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint in respect of failure to pay the national minimum wage. | Upheld | — | £364 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,369
- 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.