Case 1303802/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Ali v Gogna Schoolwear and Sports Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1303802/2019
- Decision date
- 14 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wynn-Evans
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Ali
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Wynn-Evans sat alone at Birmingham and heard the case on 9 November 2019, 10 January 2020 and 12 February 2020. The judgment records that the claimant was represented by a welfare representative and the respondent by its director.
The tribunal stated that the claimant's claims were not well-founded and were dismissed. The extracted record does not set out separate factual findings, liability reasoning, or any monetary award.
The written record also states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless a request had been made within 14 days of the sending of the decision. No remedy was recorded in the extracted judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK listing categories; the extracted judgment text itself states only that the claimant's claims were not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK listing categories; the extracted judgment text itself states only that the claimant's claims were not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.