Case 3203152/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Sheik Farid v CitySprint (UK) Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3203152/2019
- Decision date
- 22 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Sheik Farid
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a letter dated 11/02/2020, the Tribunal gave the Claimant an opportunity to make representations or request a hearing on why the claim should not be struck out. The stated concern was that the Tribunal only has power to hear unfair dismissal complaints where an employee has been dismissed, and both the claim form and the Respondent's response stated that the Claimant had not been dismissed.
The Claimant did not make representations in writing, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing. The Tribunal therefore struck out the claim, and recorded that the hearing fixed for 05/06/2020 would not take place.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because it considered it only had jurisdiction to hear an unfair dismissal complaint where the Claimant had been dismissed. The claim form and the Respondent's response both indicated that the Claimant had not been dismissed, and the Claimant did not make sufficient written representations or request a hearing after the Tribunal's letter dated 11/02/2020. | Struck out | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.