Case 1600839/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M M Ali v Safestyle Security Services Ltd and 3 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 1600839/2021
- Decision date
- 22 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan
Parties
5 namedClaimant
Mr M M Ali
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 3 February 2023, the first respondent agreed to settle the claimant's claim in full for £1,069.20, being the sum claimed, and the claimant indicated acceptance. The judgment records that the claimant then did not apply to restore the hearing by 15 February 2023.
On 20 February 2023, Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan entered judgment recording that the claims were dismissed on deemed withdrawal following due payment of the settlement monies. The judgment does not set out any merits findings on liability, and no separate remedy breakdown was provided beyond the settlement sum recorded in the order.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted judgment text does not describe the underlying claim particulars; unfair dismissal is taken from the case listing and gov.uk category. The judgment records that the first respondent agreed to settle the claimant's claim in full for the sum claimed, and that the claim would be dismissed on deemed withdrawal after acceptance and due payment of the settlement monies. | Settled | — | £1,069 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,069
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.