Case 3201243/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Hurley v Mr Muneeb Diwan t/a Chilton Croft Dementia & Nursing Home — 2019
- Case reference
- 3201243/2019
- Decision date
- 14 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Hurley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs K Hurley, a qualified nurse working through an agency, attended an interview with Mr Muneeb Diwan t/a Chilton Croft Dementia & Nursing Home on 8 February 2019. The tribunal accepted her evidence, supported by contemporaneous text messages on 15 and 16 February 2019, that Mr Diwan offered her the post of staff nurse and that the parties agreed a rate of pay of £17 per hour. The texts also referred to uniform and start dates, and the tribunal found there was no mention of any unpaid trial period.
The tribunal found that the claimant worked a three-hour training session on 7 March 2019 and two 12-hour shifts on 11 and 14 March 2019, making 27 hours in total, and that she was not paid for that work. On the balance of probabilities, the tribunal held that there had been an oral agreement for paid work and that the claimant was contractually entitled to be paid £17 per hour. The claim of unauthorised deduction from wages therefore succeeded.
The respondent was not present at the hearing, although the tribunal was satisfied that he had notice and proceeded in his absence, taking the contents of the Response into account. The respondent's case was that the claimant was not an employee and that the hours worked were an unpaid trial period, with a later letter enclosing proposed trial-period terms and offering payment only at the minimum wage rate. The tribunal rejected that account on the evidence before it. It awarded £459 for the unpaid 27 hours at £17 per hour.
The claimant also asked for £500 said to represent loss of earnings from agency shifts she declined while believing she was employed by the respondent. The tribunal said that, although it sympathised with that position, this was not an unlawful deduction from wages and no award was made for it.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an oral agreement that the claimant would be paid £17 per hour for the work she did, and that she was not told until later that the work was said to be a trial period or unpaid. The tribunal awarded £459 for 27 hours' work and declined the separate request for £500 said to reflect loss of agency shifts. | Upheld | — | £459 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £459
- 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.