Case 3305843/2021 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr P Imanlou, Director A Farsi interpreter was also present for the 2nd Claimant and Mr Imanlou. — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305843/2021
- Decision date
- 21 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Partington Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claims at Watford on 19 June 2023 before Employment Judge Partington. Ms Z Dehghani and Mr F Eftekhani appeared in person for themselves, and Ava Media Studio Limited was represented by its director, Mr P Imanlou. A Farsi interpreter was present for the second claimant and Mr Imanlou.
The judgment records that the claimants were engaged under contracts for services with the respondent, and it did not accept that wages were owed under those arrangements. The claim for unlawful deduction from wages was therefore dismissed.
The tribunal also found that no payments were owed in respect of annual leave accrued but untaken when the claimants' contracts for services ended. The claim for holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations 1998 was dismissed.
Written reasons were not provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing and no request for written reasons was made within the time stated in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found no wages were owed to the claimants under the contracts for services between them and the respondent. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found no payments were owed in respect of annual leave accrued but untaken when the claimants' contracts for services ended, under the Working Time Regulations 1998. | 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.