Case 3200571/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Hassan v STM Group (UK) Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3200571/2021
- Decision date
- 27 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Hassan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing was held remotely by telephone BT Meet Me on 27 September 2021 before Employment Judge Burgher. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. The tribunal recorded that the remote hearing was not objected to and that a face-to-face hearing was not necessary because the issues could be determined remotely.
The only substantive issue recorded in the judgment was the claimant’s application for a redundancy payment under section 135 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal found that Mr F Hassan remained an employee of STM Group (UK) Limited and had not been dismissed.
Because there had been no dismissal, the statutory basis for a redundancy payment was not made out. The claim was therefore dismissed. The judgment does not record any monetary award or other remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found that the claimant remained an employee of the respondent and had not been dismissed, so the claim for a redundancy payment under section 135 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 135 Employment Rights 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.