Case 3307770/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Yallamilli v Moon Delivery Services Ltd, Usamah Nabib Khan — 2025
- Case reference
- 3307770/2023
- Decision date
- 20 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Yallamilli
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out Mr Yallamilli's claim. It recorded that Moon Delivery Services Ltd had been dissolved and that the claimant had not applied to have the company restored to the Register of Companies.
The tribunal also noted that on 16 December 2024 it gave the claimant an opportunity to provide written reasons why the claim should not be struck out because it had not been actively pursued. The claimant did not provide an acceptable reason.
On that basis, the tribunal ordered that the claim be struck out. The decision was approved by Employment Judge Anstis on 20 January 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment does not restate the underlying substantive label, but the GOV.UK listing category for the case is unlawful deduction from wages. The tribunal struck out the claim because the respondent company had been dissolved, the claimant had not applied to have it restored to the Register of Companies, and the claimant failed to provide an acceptable reason after being invited on 16 December 2024 to explain why the claim should not be struck out for not having been actively pursued. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.