Case 3202625/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr MD Sumsul Talukder Mr Gerard Hughes v ISS Facility Services Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3202625/2020
- Decision date
- 26 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Knight Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr MD Sumsul Talukder Mr Gerard Hughes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal held that ISS Facility Services Ltd unfairly dismissed both Claimants and wrongfully dismissed both Claimants. The judgment records those outcomes without setting out detailed reasons in the extracted text.
For the First Claimant, the Tribunal found that the Respondent was in breach of contract and made unauthorised deductions from wages by failing to pay him at a rate of £14.23 per hour for at least 48 hours per week. For the Second Claimant, the Tribunal found that the Respondent was not in breach of contract and did not make unauthorised deductions from wages by failing to offer him 60 hours of work per week.
The Claimants' claims concerning failures to provide written statements of changes to particulars of employment were struck out. Remedy was not determined in this judgment; the Tribunal directed the parties to file schedules of loss and remedy evidence, and listed a remedy hearing for 22 April 2021.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recordedThis 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 | The judgment states that the Respondent unfairly dismissed the Claimants. Remedy was reserved for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states that the Respondent wrongfully dismissed the Claimants. Remedy was reserved for a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the Respondent was in breach of contract and made unauthorised deductions from wages by failing to pay the First Claimant at a rate of £14.23 per hour for at least 48 hours per week. No monetary award was made in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | This arises from the same finding as the First Claimant's unauthorised deductions claim concerning pay at £14.23 per hour for at least 48 hours per week. No monetary award was made in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the Respondent did not make unauthorised deductions from wages by failing to offer the Second Claimant 60 hours of work per week. | 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.