Case 1402752/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Helen Langdown v Mr Karan Nayyar t/a Excellent Merchandisers — 2023
- Case reference
- 1402752/2022
- Decision date
- 30 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray-Jones Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Helen Langdown
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal first recorded, by consent, that the correct identity of the respondent was Mr Karan Nayyar. It also found that the effective date of termination of the claimant’s employment was 20 May 2022.
The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was dismissed. The tribunal found that, for the period 1 May to 20 May 2022, the claimant did not have an express or implied contractual term entitling her to contractual sick pay, so that complaint was not well founded.
The tribunal also dismissed the issue concerning statutory sick pay. It stated that it did not have jurisdiction to determine whether the claimant was entitled to statutory sick pay during 1 May to 20 May 2022, or, if so, what sum would have been payable.
The holiday pay complaint was dismissed because the claimant withdrew it. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found there was no express or implied contractual term entitling the claimant to contractual sick pay for 1 May to 20 May 2022. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal said it did not have jurisdiction to determine whether the claimant was entitled to statutory sick pay for 1 May to 20 May 2022, or the sum payable if such entitlement existed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay complaint was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.