Case 6020159/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Anwar v Chai Group Ltd and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6020159/2024
- Decision date
- 4 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Z Anwar
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge M Butler made a determination under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 (default judgment) following the first respondent Chai Group Ltd's failure to present a valid response in time. The claim against the second respondent Sahar Ali was dismissed; Chai Group Ltd was held to be the correct former employer of the claimant Mr Z Anwar.
The Tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages (gross sum producing a net £2,584), dismissal in breach of contract attracting damages of £807.69 gross (one week statutory notice as Post Employment Notice Pay), and unpaid accrued but untaken holiday entitlement of £4,000 gross.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £7,391.69 in total. The hearing listed on 9 April 2025 was cancelled. Notice of the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 was given.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim against second respondent (Sahar Ali) dismissed; Chai Group Ltd held to be the correct former employer. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Net payment of £2,584; respondent ordered to pay such gross sum as results in this net amount. | Upheld | — | £2,584 |
| Breach of contract | Damages for dismissal in breach of contract (1 week's statutory notice; £3,500/month x 12 / 52 = £807.69, gross). | Upheld | — | £808 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued but untaken holiday entitlement (gross). | Upheld | — | £4,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,392
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 22 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990
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.