Case 3200853/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mr S Babaei v Final Post Limited — 2020

Case reference: 3200853/2020
Decision date: 15 December 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Gardiner Members
Panel members: Ms M Long, Mr B Wakefield

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr S Babaei

Respondent

Final Post Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At the CVP hearing on 11 December 2020 before Employment Judge Gardiner with Ms M Long and Mr B Wakefield, the tribunal found the claimant's unfair dismissal claim under section 94 Employment Rights Act 1996 well founded. It stated that there should be no reduction in the remedy for contributory conduct or under Polkey v AE Dayton Services Limited.

The tribunal also held that the claimant was entitled to two weeks' notice pay. It dismissed the claim for unpaid overtime by way of unauthorised deduction of wages under section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996, and dismissed the claim under section 10 Employment Relations Act 1999 that the respondent had refused the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary hearing.

The claim for unpaid holiday pay under regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and the breach of contract claim for unpaid expenses were withdrawn. The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to provide a statement of employment particulars required by section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996 and said the section 38 Employment Act 2002 remedy was an award of four weeks' pay. It also recorded a failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice in relation to disciplinary procedures and listed a remedy hearing for 28 April 2021. No final quantified monetary total is set out in this liability judgment.

Claims and outcomes

7 findings recorded

This case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Claim under section 94 Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeded; the tribunal said there should be no reduction for contributory conduct or under Polkey v AE Dayton Services Limited.	Upheld	—	—
Breach of contract	Claim for notice pay succeeded; the tribunal held the claimant was entitled to two weeks' notice pay.	Upheld	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	Claim for unpaid overtime by way of unauthorised deduction of wages under section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996 was dismissed.	Dismissed	—	—
Other	Claim under section 10 Employment Relations Act 1999 that the claimant was refused the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary hearing was dismissed.	Dismissed	—	—
Holiday pay	Claim for unpaid holiday pay under regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 was withdrawn.	Withdrawn	—	—
Breach of contract	Claim for unpaid expenses, pleaded as breach of contract, was withdrawn.

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.