Case 4100620/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Salim Eqbal v RA Guards Ltd — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100620/2017
- Decision date
- 14 August 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Salim Eqbal
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 21 judgment issued on the available material because no response had been presented by the respondent. Employment Judge Ian McPherson found that RA Guards Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Mr Salim Eqbal £1,170, described in the judgment as 156 hours at £7.50 per hour.
The tribunal also refused the claimant’s request for a further £300 described as compensation for “time/mental stress” in section 9.2 of the claim form. That request was refused because it was outwith the jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunal. The judgment records no other remedy or award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment: respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages; tribunal ordered payment of £1,170, described as 156 hours at £7.50 per hour. | Upheld | — | £1,170 |
| Other | The claimant’s request for a further £300 for compensation for 'time/mental stress' in section 9.2 of the claim form was refused as outwith the tribunal’s jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,170
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.