Case 2203598/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Huseynov v Laraka Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2203598/2021
- Decision date
- 24 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heath Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Huseynov
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a claim for unauthorised deductions from wages, saying he had not been paid for about nine months apart from a few small payments. The respondent said that, apart from the June 2021 pay and holiday entitlement, it had paid him in cash at his request. The claimant confirmed he was not bringing discrimination or breach of contract claims in these proceedings.
The tribunal found the respondent's account more plausible and held that the claimant had agreed to be paid £590 per month in cash until May 2021. In reaching that conclusion, it relied on the claimant's employment being his only income apart from a student loan, the improbability of working for nine months without pay, the absence of written payment requests until 27 May 2021, the payslips and P60/P45 records, the 28 February 2021 email exchange in which Ms Lanina told the accountant that he was paid by cash, and Mrs Batsuuri's evidence that she had seen cash handed to the claimant.
The tribunal also found that the smaller payments made from Ms Lanina's personal bank account were personal loans to a friend, not wages. It therefore dismissed the claim for alleged deductions up to 31 May 2021.
For June 2021, the respondent accepted that £1,400.47 was due for salary and accrued but untaken holiday, and the tribunal ordered payment of that amount. The claimant also sought additional consequential loss for parking tickets, lost holiday, and disruption to mobile and internet services, but the tribunal did not award any further compensation, saying it would only have been sympathetic to bank charges or interest and that the other losses were not sufficiently attributable to the unpaid sum on the evidence. No costs order was made against the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the claimant had been paid his agreed monthly wages in cash at his request up to the end of May 2021, so the complaint of unauthorised deductions for wages to 31 May 2021 failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent conceded that the June 2021 salary and accrued but untaken holiday pay, totalling £1,400.47, remained unpaid and the tribunal ordered payment of that sum. | Upheld | — | £1,400 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,400
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.24 ERA 1996
- s.24(2) ERA 1996
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.