Case 3201458/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H Mohammed v Amazon UK Services Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3201458/2024
- Decision date
- 12 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Park Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr H Mohammed
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mr Mohammed's claim for unfair dismissal was well founded and succeeded. It also found that his claim for wrongful dismissal was well founded and succeeded.
The judgment records that any compensatory award should be reduced by 20% under Polkey v Dayton Services Limited. It also records a 30% reduction to both the compensatory award and the basic award under sections 122(2) and 123(6) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. No monetary award is stated in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the unfair dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. It records percentage reductions but no monetary award. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states the wrongful dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. No monetary award is recorded. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Polkey v Dayton Services Limited [1988] ICR 142
- section 122(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 123(6) 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.