Claimant v Karun Enterprises Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the second claimant, Mr. J. Griffiths, was unfairly dismissed by the respondent. The dismissal was found to be procedurally and substantively unfair under the ordinary unfair dismissal provisions.
The tribunal determined that the first claimant, Miss S. Stevens, failed to establish that there was a fundamental breach of contract by the respondent which entitled her to resign and treat herself as constructively dismissed.
Both claimants succeeded in their claims for unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of extra shifts worked. The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimants for these additional shifts.
Both claimants succeeded in their claims for accrued but outstanding entitlement to annual leave in respect of extra shifts. The tribunal found the respondent had not properly paid holiday pay for the additional shifts worked.
Both claimants succeeded in their claims for not being provided with a written statement of employment particulars. The tribunal found the respondent had failed in its statutory duty to provide this documentation.
Facts
Two claimants, Miss S. Stevens and Mr. J. Griffiths, brought claims against their employer Karun Enterprises Limited. Both claimants alleged they worked extra shifts for which they were not properly paid and were not provided with written statements of employment particulars. Mr. Griffiths was dismissed by the respondent, while Miss Stevens resigned claiming constructive dismissal. The hearing took place over four days in December 2025 in a hybrid format.
Decision
The tribunal upheld Mr. Griffiths' unfair dismissal claim but rejected Miss Stevens' constructive dismissal claim. Both claimants succeeded in their claims for unauthorised deductions from wages for extra shifts, unpaid holiday pay relating to those shifts, and failure to provide written employment particulars. This was a liability-only judgment with remedy to be determined separately.
Practical note
Employers must pay for all hours worked, provide proper holiday pay entitlements, and issue written employment particulars, even where dismissal claims have mixed outcomes.
Case details
- Case number
- 2306381/2025
- Decision date
- 15 December 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- in house
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep