Case 2301841/2024 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mrs Arooj Qureshi (2) Mrs Saba Qureshi v Syndicate Alpha Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301841/2024
- Decision date
- 23 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Evans
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Mrs Arooj Qureshi (2) Mrs Saba Qureshi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found the first claimant's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded. It found that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from her wages in the period November to December 2023.
The respondent was ordered to pay the first claimant GBP 408, identified as the gross sum deducted, with the first claimant responsible for any tax or National Insurance. The second claimant withdrew her claim because the respondent had paid the amount due to her since she began the claim, and her claim was dismissed following withdrawal.
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 first claimant's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was found well-founded for deductions made in November to December 2023. | Upheld | — | £408 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The second claimant withdrew her claim because the respondent had paid the amount due to her since she began her claim; the claim was dismissed following withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £408
- 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.