Case 2500512/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Donkin v Halabja Limited trading as Istanbul Pizza — 2021
- Case reference
- 2500512/2021
- Decision date
- 8 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle CFCTC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Donkin
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered two monetary claims by Mr J Donkin against Halabja Limited trading as Istanbul Pizza. The claim for notice pay was found not well-founded and was dismissed. The judgment does not set out a fuller explanation for that dismissal in the extracted text.
The claimant's holiday pay claim succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £665.00 holiday pay, expressed as a net award, and stated that the respondent would be liable to the Inland Revenue for any tax and national insurance payments on that sum.
The judgment also records that the respondent's title was amended to Halabja Limited trading as Istanbul Pizza and that service was deemed to have been effected. The hearing was remote by CVP and written reasons were not provided because none were requested at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Claim for notice pay was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim was well-founded; the tribunal ordered payment of £665.00 net, with the respondent liable for any tax and national insurance on that sum. | Upheld | — | £665 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £665
- 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.