Case 3321273/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr MH Kayani v Coghlan Lodges Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3321273/2019
- Decision date
- 6 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr MH Kayani
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Hawksworth sat alone at Reading on 6 February 2020. The respondent did not attend or have representation. The tribunal held that the claimant's complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages was well-founded and succeeded. It awarded £1,279.39 for arrears of net pay for April 2019 and £25.00 for bank fees attributable to the deduction.
The tribunal also found that the claimant's complaint of non-payment of notice pay succeeded. It awarded one week's net pay of £358.22. The total sum payable to the claimant was £1,662.61. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, so no written reasons were provided in the published record unless separately requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages well-founded and awarded £1,279.39 for arrears of net pay for April 2019 plus £25.00 for bank fees attributable to the deduction. | Upheld | — | £1,304 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the complaint of non-payment of notice pay succeeded and awarded one week's net pay in the sum of £358.22. | Upheld | — | £358 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,663
- 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.