Case 2401155/2024 · Employment Tribunal
O M Jeylaani v Fast Despatch Logistics Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2401155/2024
- Decision date
- 25 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter
Parties
2 namedClaimant
O M Jeylaani
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Shotter issued a Rule 21 judgment in Case No. 2401155/2024. The tribunal found that Fast Despatch Logistics Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from O M Jeylaani's wages.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant the gross sum of £522.33. No separate award for interest was quantified in the judgment; the accompanying notice stated that interest would be payable if the award was not paid in full within 14 days of the relevant decision day, with 25 July 2024 as the relevant decision day, 26 July 2024 as the calculation day, and an 8% per annum stipulated rate.
The hearing listed for 4 October 2024 was cancelled. The judgment did not record any other adjudicated claims, panel members, protected characteristics, or additional remedy components.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment. The judgment states that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £522.33. | Upheld | — | £522 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £522
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 - Rule 21
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.