Case 3201417/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Shahzad Saeed v Reliance Facilities Management Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3201417/2023
- Decision date
- 4 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Misra KC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Shahzad Saeed
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Shahzad Saeed's claim for unauthorised deductions of wages succeeded. The tribunal held that the claim was well founded in respect of 8 days' leave carried over by agreement into 2023, and also in respect of wages and expenses due for work done in February 2023.
The respondent was ordered to pay £1,666.93 in total. That figure was made up of £590 for hours worked and expenses in February 2023, together with £1,076.93 for the 8 days of accrued but untaken leave carried over from 2022.
The judgment then states that all other complaints were not well founded and were dismissed. No further detail is given in the extracted text about those complaints, and no other remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim well founded in two respects: 8 days' leave carried over by agreement into 2023, and wages and expenses due for work done in February 2023. The award of £1,666.93 comprised £590 for hours worked and expenses in February 2023 and £1,076.93 for the accrued but untaken leave. | Upheld | — | £1,667 |
| Other | The judgment states that all other complaints were not well founded and were dismissed, but it does not identify those complaints further. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,667
- 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.