Case 2401617/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Hussain v G4s Facilities Management (uk) Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2401617/2021
- Decision date
- 29 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Warren
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Hussain
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a strike-out judgment on the claimant’s unfair dismissal complaint. By a letter dated 19 February 2021, the tribunal gave Mr B Hussain an opportunity to make written representations or request a hearing on why the unfair dismissal complaint should not be struck out for having no reasonable prospect of success.
The claimant did not make representations, or did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. On that basis, Employment Judge Warren struck out the unfair dismissal complaint under rule 37.
The judgment records that the claimant’s remaining claims were still listed for hearing on 20 September 2021. No financial remedy was awarded in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under rule 37 after a 19 February 2021 notice that the claim appeared to have no reasonable prospect of success; the claimant did not make sufficient written representations or request a hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 37
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.