Case 2201389/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Khasaia v Mr J O’Dea t/a St Clements Dental Care Heard via CVP (London Central) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2201389/2021
- Decision date
- 11 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davidson
- Panel members
- Ms M Pilfold, Mr T Cook
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Khasaia
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Ms Khasaia succeeded in her claims of unfair dismissal, direct disability discrimination, direct sex discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, breach of contract and unlawful deductions from wages. Her claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed. The judgment was given by Employment Judge Davidson sitting with lay members Ms M Pilfold and Mr T Cook in a remote CVP hearing.
On remedy, the tribunal recorded an unfair dismissal compensatory award of £14,970.00, discrimination-related loss of earnings of £6,697.20, injury to feelings of £15,000.00 and loss of statutory rights of £500.00. It also awarded £418.60 for unpaid statutory sick pay, £515.16 for notice pay and £321.84 for pension.
The written record prints a total award of £38,191.18. The judgment does not split the monetary awards between the individual successful discrimination or contractual heads of claim, so the figures are recorded in the judgment as aggregated remedies rather than claim-by-claim awards.
Claims and outcomes
7 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £14,970 |
| Disability discrimination | Recorded in the judgment as direct disability discrimination. The remedy section lists a combined discrimination-related loss of earnings and injury to feelings award, but does not split it between the disability discrimination heads. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Sex discrimination | Recorded in the judgment as direct sex discrimination. The discrimination-related award was not split between the successful discrimination heads. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | Recorded in the judgment as discrimination arising from disability. The judgment does not allocate a separate monetary figure to this head. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Breach of contract | The remedy section also awards unpaid statutory sick pay, notice pay and pension, but does not allocate those sums separately between breach of contract and unlawful deductions. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £38,191
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £14,970
- 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.