Case 3304181/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 3304181/2023
- Decision date
- 14 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hunt Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Watford on 1-2 May 2024 before Employment Judge Hunt. The claimant, Mr M Ali, appeared in person and Tesco Stores Limited was represented by Ms A. Beech, counsel. The written judgment records that oral reasons were given at the hearing.
The tribunal dismissed the claim of unfair dismissal under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It also dismissed the claims of wrongful dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages, each being found not well-founded on the evidence before the tribunal.
In addition, the tribunal dismissed the complaint that the respondent failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of employment particulars. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim brought under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Complaint that the Respondent failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.