Case 6020769/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Anika Haque v Mohammed Umair Shafiq — 2025
- Case reference
- 6020769/2024
- Decision date
- 1 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Searley Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Anika Haque
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Anika Haque's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded. It found that Mohammed Umair Shafiq had failed to pay wages for hours worked in July 2024 (£45.68), August 2024 (£80.69), September 2024 (£760.76) and October 2024 (£457.60), and had also failed to pay holiday pay (£457.60). The gross sum deducted was £1,802.33, and the tribunal ordered payment of that amount, with tax and National Insurance to be dealt with at source.
The tribunal also found that when the proceedings began the respondent was in breach of the duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars. It recorded that there were no exceptional circumstances making an award of two weeks' gross pay unjust or inequitable, and no basis before it for an award of four weeks' gross pay. It therefore ordered £457.60, calculated as two weeks' pay at 20 hours per week and £11.44 per hour, citing section 38 of the Employment Act 2022.
In addition, the judgment states that the respondent failed to give the claimant written itemised pay statements required by section 8 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for the period October 2023 to October 2024. The written record does not set out a separate monetary award for that finding. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment is £2,259.93.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded. It found unpaid wages for July, August, September and October 2024, plus unpaid holiday pay, and ordered payment of the gross sum deducted. | Upheld | — | £1,802 |
| Other | The tribunal found that when proceedings began the respondent was in breach of the duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars. It found no exceptional circumstances and no reason to award four weeks' pay, and ordered £457.60, described as two weeks' pay at 20 hours per week at £11.44 per hour. The judgment cites section 38 of the Employment Act 2022. | Upheld | — | £458 |
| Other | The judgment records that the respondent failed to give the claimant written itemised pay statements required by section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996 between October 2023 and October 2024. No separate monetary award is stated for this finding. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,260
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38 of the Employment Act 2022
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.