Case 2405616/2021 · Employment Tribunal
M Hassan v Assist Resourcing UK Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2405616/2021
- Decision date
- 26 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
M Hassan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment by Employment Judge Batten in case 2405616/2021, sent to the parties on 26 August 2021. The tribunal recorded that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £191.84 gross.
The tribunal also found an unauthorised deduction from wages in relation to the claimant's suspension period and ordered payment of £3,117.40 gross. In addition, it held that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £340.00 damages.
A further finding was that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement, for which £646.00 was ordered. The judgment text also included the standard interest notice, stating that statutory interest may apply if sums remain unpaid after 14 days, but it did not specify any separate interest amount in the award itself.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages awarded as a gross sum of £191.84. | Upheld | — | £192 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages in relation to the suspension period; gross sum of £3,117.40 awarded. | Upheld | — | £3,117 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £340.00 awarded. | Upheld | — | £340 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement; £646.00 awarded. | Upheld | — | £646 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,295
- 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.