Case 2407309/2024 · Employment Tribunal
M R Rahimi v Sakku Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2407309/2024
- Decision date
- 14 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater
Parties
2 namedClaimant
M R Rahimi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, M R Rahimi, presented the claim on 28 November 2024 against Sakku Ltd. The respondent did not present a valid response in time, and the Employment Judge determined that the claim, or part of it, could properly be decided under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. On that basis, it ordered the respondent to pay £1,119.19, calculated by reference to 9.7 days at a daily rate of £115.38.
The judgment also states that the hearing listed for 11 December 2025 was cancelled. A separate notice on interest explains the general rule that interest may be payable on tribunal awards, but the judgment itself does not quantify any interest payable in this case.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge made a determination under rule 22. The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,119.19, calculated as 9.7 days at £115.38 per day. | Upheld | — | £1,119 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,119
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.