Mr A Hadj-Chikh v Grey Court Ltd — 2021

Mr A Hadj-Chikh was employed by Grey Court Ltd as manager of the Alexandrie restaurant from 19 December 2017 until his summary dismissal on 30 August 2019. The tribunal found that his contract provided for a fixed salary, a seven-day retention at the start of employment, holiday pay on termination, and notice of one month. It accepted that holiday entitlement accrued in part from 1 January 2019 to 31 March 2019 and was carried forward by agreement, and it calculated accrued but untaken holiday at 18.69 days, worth £2,372.13 gross under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998.

On the unlawful deductions claim, the tribunal held that the claimant was a worker in retail employment for the purposes of sections 17 to 22 ERA 1996 because his role involved collecting money connected with retail transactions carried out by others. It found that the claimant's August 2019 salary of £2,750, the retained seven days' pay of £861.54, and the holiday pay of £2,372.13 were wages properly payable, and that the respondent was entitled to deduct only the £350 salary advance the claimant admitted taking. The resulting unlawful deduction from wages award was £5,633.67 gross, with the respondent ordered to account to HMRC for tax and national insurance.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's wrongful dismissal claim. Although it did not accept all of the respondent's pleaded losses, it found that the claimant took £350 without authority and only later disclosed it after suspension. On that basis, it held that he acted dishonestly, committed gross misconduct, and was in fundamental breach of contract, so the respondent was entitled to dismiss him summarily. The respondent's counterclaim for alleged cash and stock losses, unauthorised refunds, void transactions, alcohol losses, and the £1,500 bonus was dismissed because the tribunal found the losses were not proved, some were outside the relevant period, and section 25(4) ERA prevented recovery of the sums already awarded to the claimant as unlawful deductions.

The tribunal also found that the respondent breached section 8 ERA 1996 because it did not provide an itemised pay statement showing the deductions made from wages, but it made no separate monetary award because the claimant had already recovered the full unlawful deductions sum. It found aggravating features in the respondent's wholesale withholding of wages without proper analysis or a pay statement and ordered a financial penalty of £2,816.84 to the Secretary of State under section 12A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996.