Case 3203125/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Kamran Hussain v London Fire Commissioner OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 3203125/2019
- Decision date
- 27 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Elgot Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Kamran Hussain
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an open preliminary hearing in two cases, 3203125/2019 and 3201568/2021, before Employment Judge B Elgot on 17 October 2022. The tribunal dealt with case management applications rather than the substantive merits of the claims.
The Claimant's application to amend his claims in both cases was dismissed because he withdrew it at the hearing, subject only to minor corrections to dates which the Respondent accepted. The tribunal also refused the Claimant's application for a split trial and for the upcoming 17-day hearing to be limited to liability only.
As a result, the final merits hearing remained listed to consider both liability and remedy in both claims. The tribunal did not determine any substantive liability issues, and it recorded that there was insufficient time to decide the Respondent's application for costs; that application was to be put in writing and then considered further.
Claims and outcomes
2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The Claimant's application to amend his claims in both cases was dismissed upon withdrawal by him, save for minor date corrections accepted by the Respondent. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The Claimant's application for a split trial and to confine the 17-day hearing to liability only was refused; the final merits hearing remained listed to consider liability and remedy in both claims. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.