Case 2201588/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. M. Haque v One Managed Service Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2201588/2024
- Decision date
- 5 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge J. Galbraith-Marten
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. M. Haque
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting alone before Employment Judge J. Galbraith-Marten at London Central on 2 December 2024, considered the claimant Mr M. Haque's complaints of breach of contract against One Managed Service Ltd. The respondent was granted an extension of time to submit its defence to 1 May 2024.
The Tribunal found each of three breach of contract complaints to be well founded. The notice pay complaint was upheld with damages of £2,500.00 calculated on a gross basis to reflect the likelihood that the sum would be taxable as Post Employment Notice Pay. The commission complaint was upheld with damages of £500.00, with the claimant responsible for any tax or national insurance. The expenses complaint was upheld with damages of £2,207.01.
The total sum payable by the respondent was £5,207.01. The judgment does not record any further findings or legal analysis beyond the orders set out above.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract in relation to notice pay; figure calculated on gross pay to reflect likely tax treatment as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £2,500 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract in relation to commission; claimant responsible for any tax or national insurance. | Upheld | — | £500 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract in relation to expenses. | Upheld | — | £2,207 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,207
- 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.