Case 2411085/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Z El Ahmar v Salman El Rached — 2022
- Case reference
- 2411085/2021
- Decision date
- 11 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Z El Ahmar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone before Employment Judge Batten at Manchester on 10 January 2022, found that Ms Z El Ahmar was an employee of Salman El Rached. It held that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from her wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £2,702.50.
The judgment also records a separate financial penalty under section 12A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996. The penalty was set at 50% of the award, namely £1,351.25, and was made payable to the Secretary of State rather than to the claimant. The written record states that reasons were given orally and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant was an employee and that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from her wages. It ordered payment of the gross sum of £2,702.50. A separate financial penalty of £1,351.25 was imposed under section 12A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 and is payable to the Secretary of State, not to the claimant. | Upheld | — | £2,703 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,703
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £2,703
- compensatory remedy recorded
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.