Case 1806609/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M H Shabir v Turning Point — 2021
- Case reference
- 1806609/2020
- Decision date
- 12 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cox Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M H Shabir
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant worked as a Support Worker for the Respondent from 19 November 2018 to 10 July 2020. At the preliminary hearing he withdrew his notice pay claim after accepting that he had received that payment. His holiday pay and overtime or other payments claims were not determined in this judgment and he was ordered to provide further details.
The unfair dismissal claim was struck out. The Tribunal found that, because the Claimant had less than two years' continuous employment, he could only proceed if the sole or principal reason for dismissal fell within an exception in s.108(3) ERA 1996. It considered the possible health and safety exception in s.100(1)(d) ERA 1996, but found no reasonable prospect of establishing that the circumstances on 13 June 2020 involved a serious and imminent danger to health or safety within that provision.
The Tribunal treated the disability discrimination complaints as allegations of failure to make reasonable adjustments and/or indirect discrimination relating to coeliac disease. It found no reasonable prospect of establishing that the practices complained of put the Claimant at a particular or substantial disadvantage compared with employees without coeliac disease. For leftover food, it also found that requiring the Respondent to buy additional gluten-free food would not be a reasonable adjustment and that the practice of offering leftover food would be objectively justified by the aim of preventing food waste.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The notice pay claim was dismissed on withdrawal after the Claimant accepted that he had received that payment. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was struck out on the ground that it had no reasonable prospect of success because the Claimant lacked two years' continuous employment and the Tribunal found no reasonable prospect of bringing the case within s.108(3) ERA 1996. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The disability discrimination complaints about breaks, shift patterns, takeaway food and leftover food were dismissed on the ground that they had no reasonable prospect of success. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- Section 108(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
- Section 108(3) Employment Rights Act 1996
- Section 100(1)(d) Employment Rights Act 1996
- Section 20(1) Equality Act 2010
- Section 19(2)(b) Equality Act 2010
- Section 20(3) Equality Act 2010
- Section 19(2)(d) Equality Act 2010
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.