Case 2408451/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Eyad Saleh v Primadent Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2408451/2022
- Decision date
- 20 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ficklin REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Eyad Saleh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Eyad Saleh brought claims against Primadent Ltd for breach of contract in respect of notice pay and for unpaid wages. The hearing took place by CVP before Employment Judge Ficklin on 19 December 2022, and the judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal dismissed the breach of contract claim. It found that the notice pay claim was not well-founded. The tribunal upheld the unpaid wages claim and awarded the claimant £640, described in the judgment as gross of tax and national insurance.
The judgment records a total award of £640. It also notes the Employment Tribunal interest information, including the relevant decision day of 20 December 2022 and calculation day of 21 December 2022, but no separate interest sum is recorded in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant's notice pay claim was not well-founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant's unpaid wages claim well-founded and awarded £640 gross of tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £640 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £640
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.