Case 2405484/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Ashfaq v Medrescue 24 Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2405484/2021
- Decision date
- 21 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater
- Panel members
- Ms A Gilchrist, Mr A Wells
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Ashfaq
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously found that Mr M Ashfaq's complaint of disability discrimination was not well founded, and that claim was dismissed.
It also found that MedRescue 24 Limited had made unauthorised deductions from wages in two respects. First, it failed to pay the claimant in lieu of accrued but untaken holiday on termination, for which it ordered a gross payment of £1,228.09. Second, it failed to pay all furlough wages due for the period before termination, for which it ordered a gross payment of £1,067.26.
The judgment states that the gross sums are to be paid less any appropriate deductions for tax and National Insurance, if any, for which the respondent must account to HMRC. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment is £2,295.35 gross.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded as a gross sum for failure to pay in lieu of accrued but untaken holiday on termination; subject to appropriate tax and National Insurance deductions, if any. | Upheld | — | £1,228 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded as a gross sum for failure to pay furlough wages due for the period before termination; subject to appropriate tax and National Insurance deductions, if any. | Upheld | — | £1,067 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,295
- 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.