Case 6004363/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Kang v Metagravity Group Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004363/2024
- Decision date
- 18 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ramsden Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Kang
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that it was the appropriate forum to decide the dispute under section 15C(2)(a) of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982. It also found that the parties' relationship remained governed by the written contract of employment dated 15 May 2023, that this had not been displaced by an independent contractor agreement, and that the contract was governed by English law.
The Respondent breached the contract by not paying the Claimant's salary for 1 to 26 April 2024 and by not paying him in lieu of six days of accrued but untaken annual leave at termination. The Tribunal ordered payment of US $10,833.33 for salary and US $3,561.54 for accrued holiday.
The expenses claim did not succeed. The Tribunal found that the Claimant had not discharged the burden of proving that the disputed expenses met the reimbursement conditions in the contract and Staff Handbook.
Claims and outcomes
3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Unpaid salary for 1 to 26 April 2024, awarded in US dollars. | Upheld | — | £10,833 |
| Breach of contract | Payment in lieu of six days of accrued but untaken annual leave on termination, awarded in US dollars. | Upheld | — | £3,562 |
| Breach of contract | The expenses reimbursement allegation was dismissed because the Claimant did not satisfy the tribunal that the expenses met the contractual and handbook conditions for reimbursement. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,395
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 15C(2)(a) of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982
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.