Case 2203893/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Alkatheri v Ginseng Limited London Central — 2023
- Case reference
- 2203893/2022
- Decision date
- 17 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicolle
- Panel members
- Mr I Mclaughlin, Ms D Olulode
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Alkatheri
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Nicolle sat with non-legal members Mr I Mclaughlin and Ms D Olulode. The tribunal found that Mr F Alkatheri was an employee of Ginseng Limited London Central for the one day he worked on 25 April 2022 under section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The claim for an unauthorised deduction from wages succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £768 in relation to the one day worked and one week contractual notice pay. It then uplifted that sum by 25% because of a failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Conduct on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures (2015), producing a total gross sum of £960. The tribunal recorded that the claimant was responsible for any applicable tax and employer national insurance contributions.
The claim for direct discrimination because of religion or belief under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 failed and was dismissed. Oral reasons were given to the parties on 17 March 2023.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant was an employee for the one day worked on 25 April 2022 and ordered payment of £768 in relation to that work and one week contractual notice pay. The sum of £768 was uplifted by 25% for failure to comply with the ACAS Code, producing a gross total of £960. | Upheld | — | £960 |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Direct discrimination because of religion or belief under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £960
- 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.