Case 3200683/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Khaja Mr S Wahid v Five Pound World Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 3200683/2019
- Decision date
- 24 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Taylor
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Khaja Mr S Wahid
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Khaja and Mr S Wahid were listed as claimants against Five Pound World Ltd in case numbers 3200683/2019 and 3200684/2019. The judgment records that they did not attend the hearing, either in person or through a representative, and that the tribunal considered the information available before dismissing the claim.
No findings on the merits of the underlying employment complaints are recorded in this short decision, and no remedy was awarded. The judgment is dated 24 October 2019 and signed by Employment Judge Taylor.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment only states that the claimants did not attend the hearing and that, after considering the available information, the claim was dismissed. It does not set out claim-specific findings. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment only states that the claimants did not attend the hearing and that, after considering the available information, the claim was dismissed. It does not set out claim-specific findings. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment only states that the claimants did not attend the hearing and that, after considering the available information, the claim was dismissed. It does not set out claim-specific findings. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment only states that the claimants did not attend the hearing and that, after considering the available information, the claim was dismissed. It does not set out claim-specific findings. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.