Case 1800196/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Currer v Adil Hussain — 2020
- Case reference
- 1800196/2020
- Decision date
- 18 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Licorish Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Currer
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant withdrew his constructive unfair dismissal complaint because he had not terminated his contract of employment. The tribunal did not dismiss that complaint, and it also dismissed the breach of contract claim for want of jurisdiction on the basis that the employment had not ended. The claim for outstanding holiday entitlement under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 also failed because there had been no termination.
The tribunal upheld the discrimination complaints, finding that the respondent treated Mr C Currer less favourably because of race and/or religion by failing to pay him the national minimum wage and suspending him without pay from 10 August 2019. It awarded £27,729.87 for that discrimination loss, made up of past financial loss, future financial loss, injury to feelings, and interest. The past loss figure included NMW shortfalls for 2017/2018, 2018/2019 and April 2019 to 9 August 2019, unpaid salary from 10 August 2019 to 13 March 2020, and accrued annual leave prevented during suspension.
The tribunal also found an unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of arrears of pay and unpaid salary from 10 August 2019 to the hearing date, but no additional compensation was awarded because that loss had already been covered. It held that the respondent unreasonably failed to follow the ACAS Code on grievance procedures and added 25% to the compensation, amounting to £6,932.47. Separately, because the respondent was in breach of the duty to provide written employment particulars when proceedings began, it ordered a further £1,034.44, representing four weeks' gross pay. The stated monetary awards in the judgment therefore sum to £35,696.78.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Withdrawn because the claimant had not terminated his contract of employment; the tribunal said it was not in the interests of justice to dismiss the complaint. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal found less favourable treatment because of race and/or religion by failing to pay the national minimum wage and suspending the claimant without pay from 10 August 2019. The award was not split between the race and religion claims. | Upheld | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The tribunal found less favourable treatment because of race and/or religion by failing to pay the national minimum wage and suspending the claimant without pay from 10 August 2019. The award was not split between the race and religion claims. | Upheld | Religion or belief | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions were found in respect of arrears of pay at the national minimum wage and non-payment of salary from 10 August 2019 to the date of hearing, but no additional compensation was awarded because the loss was already reflected in the discrimination award. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the claimant's employment had not terminated. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £35,697
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £17,976
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.