← Back to case studies
Case law
Mehta v Itarmi UK Ltd

If you agreed to take less pay “for now”, your written contract can still say you’re owed the difference.

The ruling

“Unpaid wages claim succeeded (£70,743.63 awarded); breach of contract and constructive dismissal both failed.”

Your written contract sets your legal entitlement, whatever you may have agreed informally.

  • If you accept less pay "for now", get it in writing that the shortfall will be paid back, and when.
  • An unpaid wages claim can succeed on its own even when related claims, like constructive dismissal, do not.
  • Wage claims are subject to a two-year limit, so act promptly rather than letting a shortfall sit unaddressed.
  • If your situation mixes unpaid wages, redundancy, and possible constructive dismissal, get advice early. These claims interact in ways that are easy to get wrong on your own.
Read the full case

The situation

A senior employee at Itarmi UK Ltd, an IT staffing company, agreed informally before he even started that he would be paid less than the £120,000 salary fixed, with no conditions, in his written contract, on the understanding it was temporary until the company secured outside investment. In practice he was paid far less for years, rising gradually as the business grew, while the investment the company was expecting kept failing to fully materialise. When the company made him redundant, he resigned and brought claims over his unpaid salary and the circumstances of his departure.

What the tribunal found

The tribunal ruled that his written contract, not the informal side-arrangement, set what he was legally owed. An employer cannot deduct from your wages unless you've agreed to it in writing in advance, and section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 makes that the rule. Because the employee had only agreed to receive less for now, not to give up the difference for good, the shortfall kept accruing as a debt. The tribunal ordered the company to pay £70,743.63 gross in unpaid wages, covering the two years before he brought his claim, which is as far back as the law allows. His breach of contract claim failed separately, because the specific condition that would have triggered payment of the rest, in this case a large investment actually coming through, had not been met by the time he left. His constructive dismissal claim failed too: the tribunal found the redundancy itself was genuine, and that none of his reasons for resigning, including the unpaid salary, amounted to a breach serious enough to justify walking out immediately.

Full citation

Mehta v Itarmi UK Ltd, ET Case No. 3309474/2023, Employment Tribunal (Watford), decided 20 May 2026 (liability judgment 30 March 2026).

Last reviewed 17 July 2026