Case 6012345/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Zakaria Uddin v Complete Jobs Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6012345/2025
- Decision date
- 5 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Sugarman Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Zakaria Uddin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard the case on 5 December 2025 at the East London Hearing Centre by CVP, with the Claimant self-representing and the Respondent not in attendance. Employment Judge A Sugarman determined two complaints of breach of contract brought by Mr Zakaria Uddin against Complete Jobs Limited.
The first complaint, concerning the Respondent's failure to pay notice pay, was upheld. The Respondent was ordered to pay £2,136.99 gross plus interest of £78.36, totalling £2,215.35. The second complaint, concerning the Respondent's failure to pay tax deducted at source to HMRC in October and December 2024 (which caused loss to the Claimant when he received a tax rebate in summer 2025), was also upheld, with an order to pay £344.12.
The Respondent was therefore ordered to pay the Claimant the total sum of £2,559.47. Written reasons were not provided as none were requested at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Failure to pay notice pay; £2,136.99 gross plus £78.36 interest (total £2,215.35). | Upheld | — | £2,137 |
| Breach of contract | Failure to pay tax deducted at source to HMRC in October and December 2024, causing loss to the Claimant on his 2025 tax rebate. | Upheld | — | £344 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,559
- 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.