Mr Sanjay Mehta v Itarmi UK Limited — 2026

Mr Mehta was employed by Itarmi UK Limited from February 2020 as Chief Commercial Officer and Chief Legal Officer. The main dispute was whether his contract provided for a basic annual salary of £120,000 from the start, or whether he was only meant to receive £2,000 per month until investment was secured. The tribunal rejected Brett Riley's evidence that the £120,000 figure had been inserted by mistake, found the written contract clear and unqualified, and held that the parties' common intention was that the claimant would receive less money only temporarily, with the unpaid balance continuing to accrue.

On that basis, the tribunal held that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages. It found there was no agreement that the unpaid portion of salary would never accrue or be payable, and said the deductions claim was limited by the two-year rule back from the ET1 presented on 4 August 2023. The supplied text does not contain a final monetary figure, and the introductory dispositive section still shows the amount as to be confirmed. The tribunal also said the separate breach of contract issue was not finally resolved in the supplied text and would require further submissions at the remedy hearing on the trigger event to imply into the contract for deciding whether there had been a breach as at the EDT.

The constructive unfair dismissal claim failed. The tribunal found there was a genuine redundancy situation, that the meetings in February and March 2023 involved redundancy consultation alongside without prejudice discussions, and that the respondent had raised legitimate management concerns in the 28 April and 9 May 2023 correspondence about the claimant's activity during notice and his sickness reporting. It also found that the share option issue concerned a different legal entity, Itarmi Holdco Limited, so it could not amount to a breach by this respondent.