Case 2301095/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Abdilaziz Abdulah v Vehicle Service Centre Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301095/2022
- Decision date
- 25 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tsamados
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Abdilaziz Abdulah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard in public by CVP on 25 November 2022 before Employment Judge Tsamados sitting alone. The Claimant was represented in person and the Respondent was represented by its accountant. The judgment records one race discrimination complaint, which was dismissed on withdrawal.
The Tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal complaint because the Claimant had less than two years' employment with the Respondent, which meant the qualifying period in section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not met. No findings were made on the substance of that complaint.
The Tribunal also held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaints of unauthorised deduction from wages and damages for breach of contract because both were presented outside the relevant time limits. The judgment identifies section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and article 7 of the Employment Tribunal's Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 as the relevant time-limit provisions. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the complaint of race discrimination was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint because the Claimant had less than two years' employment with the Respondent, as required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint because it was presented outside the relevant time limit under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Other | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the damages for breach of contract complaint because it was presented outside the relevant time limit under article 7 of the Employment Tribunal's Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- article 7 Employment Tribunal's Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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.