Case 1304149/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Hussain v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions — 2025
- Case reference
- 1304149/2024
- Decision date
- 3 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Edmonds Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Hussain
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place at Birmingham by CVP on 3 February 2025 before Employment Judge Edmonds. The claimant, Mr S Hussain, did not attend and was not represented. The respondent, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, was represented by Mr D Evans, solicitor.
The judgment states that the claimant’s claim was dismissed in its entirety under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because he failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. No reasons dealing with the merits of the pleaded claims were provided.
On the material available, the tribunal therefore disposed of the case procedurally rather than after findings on liability. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed in its entirety under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the claimant failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Dismissed in its entirety under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the claimant failed to attend or be represented at the hearing. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.