Case 3323528/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Q R Mahrban Moqadam v Animals Are US Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3323528/2019
- Decision date
- 30 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Brown
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Q R Mahrban Moqadam
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a CVP hearing on 21 July 2022 before Employment Judge T Brown sitting alone, the Claimant appeared in person and the Respondent did not attend or make representations. The tribunal recorded that the complaints of religion or belief discrimination, disability discrimination, unfair dismissal, and the reference in relation to a redundancy payment were dismissed on withdrawal.
The tribunal held that the part of the breach of contract claim alleging a contractual term requiring the Respondent to provide living accommodation was outside the Employment Tribunal's jurisdiction under Articles 3 and 5 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. It found the remainder of the breach of contract claim well-founded for unpaid wages for 1 to 13 June 2019 and for the post-dismissal element, which it treated as a wrongful dismissal issue.
The Respondent was ordered to pay £10,192.14, made up of £2,692.31 unpaid wages, £5,384.62 notice pay, £796 professional indemnity insurance, £263 unpaid employer pension contributions, and £1,056.21 accrued but untaken annual leave. Interest of £2,533.24 was also awarded on that sum from 13 June 2019 to 21 July 2022, producing a total award of £12,725.38.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment refers to a redundancy payment reference; dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held that the living-accommodation term was outside jurisdiction under Articles 3 and 5 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, but found the remainder of the contract claim well-founded for unpaid wages before dismissal and the post-dismissal element. The monetary award was not apportioned between claim heads. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,725
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Articles 3 and 5 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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.