Case 2217547/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 2217547/2024
- Decision date
- 18 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Coen
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London Central on 9 December 2024 before Employment Judge Coen sitting alone. Mr S. Ali appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr G. Deane, Counsel.
The Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claimant’s claims because the requirement in section 18A(8) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 to obtain an ACAS certificate before the commencement of proceedings had not been satisfied. The judgment does not set out any merits findings on the underlying claims.
The judgment therefore records a jurisdictional disposal only, with no monetary award and no separate remedy assessment. Judgment was sent to the parties on 18 December 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim types; it records only that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because of the requirement in section 18A(8) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 to obtain an ACAS certificate before proceedings were commenced. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 18A(8) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.