Case 3308767/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Poddar v Ai4Process Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3308767/2024
- Decision date
- 29 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harrison Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Poddar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr S Poddar brought complaints against Ai4Process Ltd for unauthorised deductions from wages and breach of contract. At the hearing on 15 October 2025 before Employment Judge Harrison, the parties agreed that the complaint about 29 March 2024 should be allowed by consent, and the respondent would pay the claimant his gross daily rate of £269.23 for that day.
The tribunal dismissed the remaining complaints as not well-founded. Those were the unauthorised deduction claim relating to 5 days' unaccrued holiday taken from 18-22 March 2024, the unauthorised deduction claim relating to 4 days' unauthorised absence from 25-28 March 2024, the breach of contract claim about expenses for an Employee Immigration Health Surcharge, and the breach of contract claim about family visa costs.
The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing. No separate written reasons were provided in the decision record sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | By consent, the complaint concerning 29 March 2024 was allowed and the respondent agreed to pay the claimant his gross daily rate of £269.23 for that day. | Upheld | — | £269 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint relating to 5 days' unaccrued holiday taken from 18-22 March 2024 was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint relating to 4 days' unauthorised absence from 25-28 March 2024 was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim relating to a failure to pay expenses for an Employee Immigration Health Surcharge was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim relating to a failure to pay family visa costs was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £269
- 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.