Case 3306008/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Zaman v Petrogas Group UK Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3306008/2023
- Decision date
- 10 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maxwell Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Zaman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant said he was employed from 20 September 2022 to 17 May 2023 as Site Manager and presented his claim on 5 June 2023. The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim for lack of jurisdiction because he did not have the qualifying employment required under section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It also rejected the suggestion that the claim form pleaded breach of contract, saying the complaint was instead about the absence of procedure and advance warning of dismissal.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out for lack of jurisdiction because the claimant did not have the qualifying employment required by section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal construed the ET1 as including direct race discrimination under section 13 EqA 2010 in relation to the extension of probation and dismissal. The allegation was not struck out, but the tribunal found it had little reasonable prospect of success and made a £100 deposit order; the late proposed amendment to add separate pre-dismissal comments by Ms Snock was refused. | Other | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
12 references- section 108 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- Selkent Bus Co Ltd t/a Stagecoach Selkent v Moore
- Abercrombie v Aga Rangemaster Ltd
- Transport and General Workers Union v Safeway Stores Ltd
- Vaughan v Modality Partnership
- Chandhok v Tirkey
- Rule 37(1)(a) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Ezsias
- Anyanwu v South Bank Students' Union
- Ahir v British Airways PLC
- Van Rensburg v Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames
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.