Claimant v Mazaar UK Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal complaint because the claimant does not have sufficient service. Under ERA 1996, employees generally require two years' continuous service to bring an unfair dismissal claim (unless it is automatically unfair).
The tribunal found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the period 1-14 August 2024. The claimant was entitled to full payment for work done during this period and the respondent failed to pay the full amount owed.
The tribunal found that the respondent breached the claimant's contract by failing to provide proper notice pay. The claimant was entitled to notice pay under his contract or by statute, and the respondent failed to pay this amount upon termination.
The tribunal found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay the claimant for holidays accrued but not taken on the date employment ended. Under the Working Time Regulations, employees are entitled to be paid for accrued untaken holiday upon termination.
Facts
Mr McKenzie worked for Mazaar UK Limited until 14 August 2024. His employment ended without sufficient service for unfair dismissal protection. The respondent failed to pay him for the period 1-14 August 2024, failed to provide proper notice pay, and failed to pay for accrued untaken holiday. The respondent also owed him statutory guarantee pay for lay off and expenses reimbursement.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim for lack of qualifying service but upheld all wage-related claims. The respondent was ordered to pay unpaid wages for August 2024, notice pay, holiday pay, statutory guarantee pay and expenses, totalling £6,710.64 net.
Practical note
Employers must pay all contractual and statutory entitlements on termination (wages, notice, holiday pay) even when an employee lacks qualifying service for unfair dismissal protection.
Award breakdown
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3202219/2024
- Decision date
- 26 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- in house
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No