Case 2600739/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Sheraz Ali v Bee Security Group Limited PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 2600739/2022
- Decision date
- 30 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Camp Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Sheraz Ali
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt this preliminary hearing, Employment Judge Camp dismissed the claimant’s claim for repayment of pension contributions. The tribunal held that the sums in question were not unauthorised deductions from wages but were legally mandated.
The tribunal also made a finding of fact for the separate holiday pay / compensation for accrued but untaken annual leave claim. It found that the claimant’s employment came to an end when or before the respondent presented its response on 7 April 2022, so that claim could proceed to a final hearing on that basis.
In reaching that finding, the tribunal noted that both parties agreed the claimant last worked for the respondent in December 2021. It also relied on the respondent’s response form, which stated that the claimant’s employment ended on 13 December 2021 and referred to the claimant’s employment in the past tense, despite no termination letter or P45 having been sent.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for repayment of pension contributions was dismissed because the tribunal found the deductions were legally mandated rather than unauthorised. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.