Case 1403083/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Dev Bahadur Khadka v Saiham & Soikat Trading Ltd — 2020

Case reference: 1403083/2019
Decision date: 28 October 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Housego Representation
Venue: Exeter

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Dev Bahadur Khadka

Respondent

Saiham & Soikat Trading Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At an earlier hearing, the religion or belief discrimination claim was withdrawn and the sex discrimination and paternity pay claims were dismissed; this judgment dealt with the remaining claims for notice pay and holiday pay. The tribunal heard oral evidence from both sides, accepted the claimant’s account supported by text messages, and found that he started work on 1 May 2018 and was dismissed by a text message on 26 January 2019. It rejected the respondent’s account that he had simply stopped attending work or was working elsewhere, and found there was no gross misconduct.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Holiday pay	The order at paragraph 1 awards £968.58 holiday pay. The reasons at paragraph 15 calculate £986.58, and the stated total award of £2,004.48 matches that calculation rather than the figure in the order.	Upheld	—	£969
Breach of contract	Notice pay was awarded at one month’s pay because the claimant was paid monthly and was entitled to a month’s notice. The tribunal found there was no gross misconduct and no basis to deny notice pay.	Upheld	—	£1,018

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £2,004; across all upheld claims

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.