Case 2500155/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Sepehri Dolanghar v Komur Roma Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500155/2023
- Decision date
- 30 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Newburn Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Sepehri Dolanghar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 30 March 2023 at Newcastle CFCTC by CVP, before Employment Judge Newburn, the claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not attend. The tribunal amended the respondent's name to Komur Roma Limited.
The tribunal held that the claimant's breach of contract claim under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 succeeded in respect of notice pay and holiday pay. It awarded £650.00 net for unpaid notice and £598.00 net for 4.6 days' pay in lieu of untaken holiday.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,310.00 net for 10 days' unpaid wages. The judgment stated that both awards were net sums and that the respondent would be liable to the Inland Revenue for any tax and national insurance due on them. The total award was £2,558.00.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Succeeded under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 in respect of notice pay and holiday pay. The judgment awarded £650.00 net for unpaid notice and £598.00 net for 4.6 days' pay in lieu of untaken holiday. | Upheld | — | £1,248 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £1,310.00 net relating to 10 days' unpaid wages. | Upheld | — | £1,310 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,558
- 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.