Case 2308368/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Valimulla v Al-Khair Foundation — 2021
- Case reference
- 2308368/2020
- Decision date
- 22 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Representation
- Venue
- via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Z Valimulla
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a claim of unfair dismissal after his role as Masjid Liaison Officer was made redundant. The respondent said the dismissal was for redundancy following the Covid-19 pandemic, changes to its operating model, and uncertainty about when community fundraising could resume.
The Tribunal accepted that the redundancy was genuine and that the requirement for the claimant's work had ceased or diminished, or was expected to do so. It found that the respondent considered the claimant's representations, that consultation was effective overall, and that the process and decision were within the range of reasonable responses for a small employer during the pandemic.
The Tribunal found the dismissal was fair by reason of redundancy. The unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The available PDF text is truncated in the middle, but the judgment heading, opening judgment, and conclusion state that the unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- Williams v Compair Maxam Ltd 1982 ICR 156 EAT
- R v British Coal Corporation 1994 IRLR 72
- Burchell test
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.