Case 6004239/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Neville Hathiram v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004239/2025
- Decision date
- 22 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kilgannon Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Neville Hathiram
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the claimant's claim for compensation for untaken rest days under Rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024, finding that it had no reasonable prospect of success.
The tribunal found the claimant's holiday pay claim under the Working Time Regulations 1998 to be well-founded. It found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement of 24 days and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £4,716.17, accounting to HMRC for any tax and National Insurance due on that sum.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | Claim for compensation for untaken rest days was struck out under Rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024 because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim in respect of holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations 1998 was found well-founded. | Upheld | — | £4,716 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,716
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024
- Working Time Regulations 1998
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.