Case 3203230/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Saji Karunakaran v RGB HiFi & Video Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3203230/2022
- Decision date
- 15 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Travers Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Saji Karunakaran
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Saji Karunakaran brought claims against RGB HiFi & Video Limited in the Employment Tribunal. The hearing took place remotely by Cloud Video Platform at East London Hearing Centre on 18 October 2022 before Employment Judge Travers, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by Jennifer Platt of SAS Daniels LLP.
The extracted judgment text records only the tribunal's disposition. It states that all claims are dismissed and gives the decision date as 15 November 2022. No separate findings of fact, liability reasoning, or remedy assessment appear in the supplied text.
On the material available in the extracted judgment text, the claims recorded in the case context as redundancy pay, unfair dismissal, and unlawful deduction from wages were all dismissed and no monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.