Mr MD A Kashem v Continental One Ltd: 6013180/2025
JUDGMENT
[1]The claim was presented in the Manchester Employment Tribunal on 16 April 2025. The respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. The Tribunal has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim in accordance with rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.[2]The claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and the respondent must pay damages to the claimant of £440.REASONS
[1]The claimant was offered employment by the respondent on the basis of 40 hours per week at £11 per hour, to provide care services in the Greater Manchester area, in 2023.[2]The claimant emigrated from Bangladesh to the UK to take up the respondent’s job offer and the respondent was his sponsor for visa purposes. The claimant understood that the job was for a fixed-term of four years and that he would be guaranteed £22880 per year salary, based on £11 per hour rate of pay and a 40-hour working week. However, I was not provided with any contract of employment or job offer, only the claimant’s visa application form completed by the respondent which indicated that the visa was for 4 years, and which contained information about the type of job that the claimant would be doing and the rate of pay. The claimant has consistently said that he was not told where he was going to work, providing the care services, or who for.[3]It would be extremely unusual for any worker in the UK to have a guaranteed income for four years without the right of the employer to end the contract sooner than that – under UK law either party to a contract can terminate the contract by giving notice to the other. Therefore, although the claimant asks that he receive four years’ salary, there is no automatic entitlement to that. In the absence of a written contract or clear oral terms to the contrary, the implied terms are for either party to be able to give notice to the other to end the contract. Where the contract has lasted for less than two years, the notice required is one week, unless the contract gives a different notice period.[4]There is some suggestion in the papers that the claimant provided to me for this hearing that the respondent required that the claimant pay a large sum of money to obtain a visa, in the region of over £20,000. I have no authority to compensate the claimant for this money. If he considers that this is fraud on the part of the respondent’s directors, Tawanda Clarence Muzondo and Stacey Mabika, he should report this to the British police.[5]He asked that I refer him as a victim of modern slavery via the National Referral Mechanism, but the Employment Tribunal is not a designated “first responder” organisation and so I have no authority to do that. I have told the claimant to visit the Citizens Advice Bureau in the town where he lives, as they are designated first responders and may be able to assist him.[6]The claimant arrived in the UK on 30 November 2023. He was told by the respondent to apply for DBS clearance, which he did, and to pass his UK driving test, which he did. He was also required by the respondent to do a week’s online medical training in order to be able to start work, which he did in February 2024, which he says took him 40 hours, or one working week.[7]The claimant is not the only person who was promised work by the respondent and did not receive it. There would appear to be approximately 10-20 others in the same situation as the claimant.[8]He and others in the same situation as him were repeatedly told by the respondent that work would be forthcoming, and that they were having issues with CQC registration, but that they should be patient. The claimant was told by the respondent to look for other work alongside his work for the respondent in the meantime, and he did look, but was unable to find work given the nature of his visa and the fact that the respondent was his sponsor.[9]Eventually, the claimant realised that no work would be forthcoming and the respondent stopped communicating with him. He started ACAS Early Conciliation on 10 March 2025 as he realised at that point that his relationship with the respondent was at an end.[10]It is very difficult to identify what the claimant’s relationship with the respondent is, and whether it is that of an employee or an agency worker. I originally considered that the claimant was an agency worker, however on a close reading of the respondent’s description of his job in the visa sponsorship document, I accept that the claimant was offered employment directly with the respondent.[11]Without any evidence from the respondent, it is very difficult to say when the claimant’s employment with the respondent started. Other than the week’s training, he has clearly not done any work for them. However, given that the week’s training was in February 2024, I find that the relationship must have started by then.[12]While there is not an absolute right to be provided with work if none is available, once enough time has elapsed without work being provided, the employer’s failure to provide work can amount to a breach of contract allowing the employee to consider himself dismissed. The claimant was given repeated assurances by the respondent to be patient and that they would sort their difficulties out, including with CQC registration. He and the other employees waited, and eventually the respondent stopped communicating with them and at that point the claimant considered himself dismissed. I find that this happened in early 2025, and the claimant stared ACAS conciliation shortly afterwards.[13]The claimant’s employment came to an end without him having been given the proper notice of termination. The respondent must pay him a week’s pay which is £440, £11 per hour for 40 hours.[14]The respondent’s company was due to be struck off the Companies House register in October 2025, but this strike-off action was discontinued after an objection was received by Companies House. The company accounts on the Companies House register show that for 2024 the company had only £76 in net assets. I told the claimant that whatever award of compensation was made in his favour, he was unfortunately unlikely to receive it from the company. When the company is struck off, he may be able to apply to the National Insurance Fund for payment of some of the money he is owed (information about this can also be obtained via www.gov.uk or the Citizens Advice Bureau.) Approved by: