Case 1802644/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Syed v Local Care Direct — 2020
- Case reference
- 1802644/2020
- Decision date
- 4 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shulman REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Z Syed
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing was before Employment Judge Shulman at Leeds on 22 July 2020. The claimant, Mr Z Syed, appeared in person and the respondent, Local Care Direct, was represented by Ms C Hennessy, Solicitor.
The judgment records that the claimant withdrew five claims: unauthorised deduction of wages (expenses), negligence, public interest disclosure (whistleblowing), common assault, and defamation. The tribunal then stated that those claims were dismissed. No factual findings on the merits of the withdrawn claims are set out in the judgment.
The judgment does not record any remedy award, legal test, or further reasons beyond the fact of withdrawal and dismissal.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Listed as 'Unauthorised deduction of wages (expenses)'. The judgment says the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and is hereby dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Listed as negligence. The judgment says the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and is hereby dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Listed as public interest disclosure. The judgment says the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and is hereby dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Listed as common assault. The judgment says the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and is hereby dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Listed as defamation. The judgment says the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and is hereby dismissed.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.