Case 1401118/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B I Muhammad v Daniel's special care Ltd and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401118/2024
- Decision date
- 6 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr B I Muhammad
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the complaints of unfair dismissal and redundancy. It had written to the claimant on 15 November 2024 giving an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing about why those complaints should not be struck out because the claimant did not have 2 years' continuous employment with the respondents.
The claimant did not make written representations or request a hearing, so the Tribunal struck out those complaints. The judgment states that the claimant's remaining claims for breach of contract, holiday pay and wages remain active and will be listed for hearing in due course.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint of unfair dismissal was struck out because the claimant did not have 2 years' continuous employment with the respondents and did not make representations or request a hearing after being invited to do so. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment describes the complaint as redundancy and states it was struck out for the same reason as the unfair dismissal complaint. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.