Case 4101029/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Raqyia Munir v Represented by: Ms R Mohammed - Solicitor Multicultural Elderly Care Centre — 2022
- Case reference
- 4101029/2022
- Decision date
- 12 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Claire McManus
- Venue
- person in Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Raqyia Munir
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a no-response multiple claim. The tribunal accepted the claimants' uncontested witness evidence and the background evidence from Shahida Zafar, and treated the Care Inspectorate correspondence cancelling the respondent's registration as important evidence that the respondent's operational activity had ceased.
On redundancy and notice, the tribunal held that claimants 2, 4 and 10 were dismissed by reason of redundancy when the day care centre closed and did not reopen at the end of furlough on 30 September 2021. It rejected redundancy and statutory notice claims for the home-support workers because their work continued for the same service users, often after payment began to come directly from those service users. The tribunal considered TUPE Reg 3(3) and Johnson Controls Ltd v Campbell and anor EAT 0041/12, but found no relevant transfer because Shahida Zafar's coordinating role meant the activity was not simply the individual carers' tasks.
The tribunal awarded unpaid wages under section 13 ERA 1996 to claimants 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 11 and 12 for the periods proved, including furlough-rate arrears where applicable. It also awarded holiday pay to all 12 claimants for accrued but untaken leave. In doing so it applied the Working Time Regulations 1998 and limited holiday recovery to one leave year rather than two, rejecting a broader carry-over argument.
For the remaining heads, the tribunal made section 38 ERA 1996 awards of two weeks' pay each for failure to issue statements of particulars, and section 12(4) ERA 1996 awards, together with a declaration, for the payslip claims pursued by claimants 1 to 4. The total award was £41,783.52, and the respondent was permitted to deduct income tax and employee national insurance from sums other than the redundancy payments before remitting the balance.
Claims and outcomes
8 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payments for claimants 2, 4 and 10. | Upheld | — | £13,288 |
| Redundancy | Claimants 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12; the tribunal found their work continued or moved directly to service users and did not amount to redundancy. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Statutory notice pay under Part IX ERA 1996 for claimants 2, 4 and 10. | Upheld | — | £5,502 |
| Other | Claimants 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12; no entitlement to statutory notice pay was found. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid wages and furlough-rate arrears for claimants 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 11 and 12. | Upheld | — | £9,596 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued but untaken holiday pay for all 12 claimants. | Upheld | — | £9,077 |
| Other | Section 1 and section 38 ERA 1996 awards for failure to issue statements of particulars of employment, at two weeks' pay each. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £41,784
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.13 ERA 1996 unauthorised deductions from wages
- s.139 ERA 1996 redundancy definition
- s.86 ERA 1996 statutory notice
- TUPE Reg 3(3) service provision change
- Johnson Controls Ltd v Campbell and anor EAT 0041/12
- Reg 13(9)-(11) WTR 1998
- s.38 ERA 1996 minimum award for failure to issue statement of particulars
- s.8 and s.12(4) ERA 1996 itemised pay statement and deduction claim
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.