Case 1805490/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Interpreter: In person Mrs M Sarvjahani v Al-Murad DIY Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1805490/2019
- Decision date
- 20 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shulman REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Interpreter: In person Mrs M Sarvjahani
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr R Gawlowski was employed by Al-Murad DIY Limited as a warehouse operative from 28 October 2012 until 16 July 2019. At the hearing before Employment Judge Shulman on 17 December 2019, the respondent did not attend. The tribunal recorded that the issues were whether the claimant was entitled to overtime and holiday pay.
On overtime, the tribunal found that although the claimant had not signed his contract, he accepted that this was not necessary, and there was nothing in the contract dealing with overtime entitlement. He said he worked Tuesday to Friday for 9.5 hours per day and Saturday for 8.5 hours, with overtime paid when he worked Sundays or Mondays, but he was unable to substantiate the period to which the alleged 14 hours of unpaid overtime related. After being given 15 minutes to consider the matter and consult with his wife, he withdrew the overtime claim and it was dismissed on withdrawal.
On holiday pay, the tribunal accepted the contractual terms providing 28 days' holiday per year including statutory days, a holiday year running from 1 April to 31 March, the ability to carry forward five days, and a calculation based on 1/260th of annual net pay. The claimant could not explain his asserted entitlement to a five-day carry forward for 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019, but for 1 April 2019 to 16 July 2019 the tribunal found he was entitled to nine days' holiday after taking one day for his daughter's holy communion. Using annual net pay of £17,524, the daily rate was £67.40 and nine days came to £606.60; after crediting £224.81 already paid on termination, the net holiday pay due was £381.79.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim for overtime payment. The tribunal found there was nothing in the contract relating to entitlement to overtime and that the claimant could not substantiate the period to which the alleged 14 hours related; after being given time to consider the position, the claimant withdrew the claim and it was dismissed on withdrawal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to holiday pay for the period 1 April 2019 to 16 July 2019. On the contractual calculation, nine days' holiday were due at £67.40 per day, giving £606.60, less £224.81 already paid on termination, leaving £381.79. | Upheld | — | £382 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £382
- 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.