Case 2207067/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Marais v Nimrodental Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2207067/2021
- Decision date
- 3 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Grewal Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Marais
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a CVP hearing on 3 May 2022 before Employment Judge Grewal, the Tribunal recorded only jurisdictional and case-management rulings. It held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claimant's religious discrimination claim, and that claim was dismissed. It also held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the holiday pay claim relating to 2010, and that claim was dismissed.
The Tribunal also dealt with the Respondent's application to strike out the unfair dismissal claim, or alternatively to obtain a deposit order in respect of that claim. That application was refused. The written record does not record a substantive merits decision on the unfair dismissal claim, and no remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | The Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the religious discrimination claim. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Holiday pay | The Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the holiday pay claim relating to 2010. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The Respondent's application to strike out the unfair dismissal claim, or alternatively for a deposit order, was refused. The merits of the unfair dismissal claim were not determined in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
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.