Finablr Ltd and others

Case Summary

The 1st Respondent was ordered to pay £248,307.72 for unlawful deductions and £6,258.48 in holiday entitlement, as well as £25,000 for breach of contract.

The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to compensation for unlawful deductions from wages, unpaid holiday entitlement, and breach of contract by the respondent employer.

• •unlawful deductions from wages
• •breach of contract

Case No: 2204168/2021 10.7 Judgment with reasons – rule 62 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Elle Kim Respondents: Finablr Ltd (1) UAE Exchange UK Ltd (2) Finablr Plc (3) Finablr Venture Holdings Ltd (4) Heard at: London Central (by cvp) On: 22-24 June 2022 Before: Employment Judge Housego Tribunal Member Brazier Tribunal Member Brett Representation Claimant: Alice Beech, of Counsel, instructed by Keystone Law Group Plc Respondents: Katya Hosking, of Counsel, instructed by Druces LLP, for the 1 st and 2 nd Respondents. The 3 rd and 4 th Respondents did not attend and were not represented. JUDGMENT 1. The 1 st Respondent made unlawful deductions from the wages of the Claimant and is ordered to pay to the Claimant the sum of £248,307.72. 2. The 1 st Respondent is ordered to pay to the Claimant £6,258.48 in respect of holiday entitlement accrued but not taken at the effective date of termination of employment. 3. The 1 st Respondent is ordered to pay to the Claimant £25,000 in respect of breach of contract. 4. The claims against the 2 nd Respondent are dismissed. 5. The claims against the 3 rd Respondent are stayed. 6. The claims against the 4 th Respondent are dismissed. Case No: 2204168/2021 10.7 Judgment with reasons – rule 62 2 REASONS The hearing 1. The Tribunal heard oral evidence from Elle Kim, from Robert Miller and from Ritesh Lahoti. There was an agreed bundle of documents of 180 pages. A bank statement was added as the hearing started. Case reports were provided by Counsel. Alice Beech provided a helpful written submission setting out the way the claims were pleaded. Katya Hosking followed the organisation of this submission in the way the 1 st and 2 nd Respondents’ cases were put. This was of much more help than the list of issues in the bundle of documents and the T…