Case 1601514/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Jamil v Specialist Security Co Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1601514/2022
- Decision date
- 19 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Mr P Bradney, Mr G Howells
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Jamil
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that Mr Jamil’s claims for unfair dismissal, detriment on the ground of a protected disclosure and/or on the ground of having raised a health and safety concern, and unauthorised deductions from wages all failed and were dismissed. The written record does not set out detailed reasons, noting only that reasons had been given orally at the hearing.
Mr Jamil’s separate claim for payment in respect of accrued but untaken holidays succeeded. The tribunal ordered Specialist Security Co Limited to pay him the gross sum of £1,596.00 in respect of that claim.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment records a detriment claim based on a protected disclosure and/or on having raised a health and safety concern; it was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for payment in respect of accrued but untaken holidays. | Upheld | — | £1,596 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,596
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.