Case 6041303/2025 · Employment Tribunal
N Masoud v Moneda Capital plc — 2025
- Case reference
- 6041303/2025
- Decision date
- 10 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Evans Date
Parties
2 namedN Masoud
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Evans determined this case under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, the respondent (Moneda Capital Plc) having failed to present a response on time. The claim was presented in the London South Employment Tribunal on 10 November 2025, and the respondent's name was amended to Moneda Capital Plc.
The Judge found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages of £3,500 each for July and August 2025, dismissed the claimant in breach of contract without giving the two months' notice to which she was entitled, and failed to pay her holiday entitlement for 10 days of accrued annual leave on termination. The respondent was ordered to pay £7,000 (wages), £7,000 (damages for breach of contract), and £1,750 (holiday pay), totalling £15,750 gross. The judgment notes the gov.uk listing categories include unfair dismissal, redundancy and whistleblowing, but the judgment text addresses only the wages, breach of contract and holiday pay claims.
Claims and outcomes
3 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Upheld | — | £7,000 |
| Breach of contract | Upheld | — | £7,000 |
| Holiday pay | Upheld | — | £1,750 |
Legal tests applied
1 referenceRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £15,750
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.