Case 2300185/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Zandkarimi v Heng Feng Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2300185/2019
- Decision date
- 3 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Zandkarimi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Ferguson, sitting alone at London South on 3 September 2019, recorded that Mr E Zandkarimi's unfair dismissal complaint succeeded. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £816.00 and a compensatory award of £1,650.63 in relation to that claim.
The tribunal also recorded that the wrongful dismissal complaint succeeded, but it made no separate award for that complaint. The holiday pay complaint likewise succeeded, with an award of £481.47.
The written record states that the total amount Heng Feng Ltd must pay is £2,948.10. It also includes a recoupment section showing a prescribed period of 1/11/18 to 3/9/19, a total award of £2,466.63, a prescribed element of £1,650.63, and a balance of £816.00. The record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint succeeded. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £816.00 and a compensatory award of £1,650.63. The recoupment section records a total award of £2,466.63, with a prescribed element of £1,650.63 and a balance of £816.00. | Upheld | — | £2,467 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The complaint succeeded, but the judgment records no separate award for this complaint. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The complaint succeeded and the tribunal awarded £481.47. | Upheld | — | £481 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,948
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £816
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £1,651
- 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.