Case 3309413/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr J Abdulla v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2024

Case reference: 3309413/2023
Decision date: 31 July 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Emery REPRESENTATION

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr J Abdulla

Respondent

Royal Mail Group Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a public preliminary hearing, the Tribunal refused the respondent's application to strike out the unfair dismissal claim on jurisdictional grounds. It found that the claimant's ACAS Early Conciliation Certificate issued on 14 November 2022 was the relevant certificate for the unfair dismissal claim and that the mandatory early conciliation requirements had been complied with.

The Tribunal dismissed the unlawful deduction of wages claim because it was not presented within the applicable time limit and it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time. It also dismissed the allegation of disability discrimination relating to an incident in March 2020 because it was out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time.

The remaining disability discrimination allegations, described as direct discrimination, harassment, and failure to make reasonable adjustments, and the race discrimination allegations, described as direct discrimination and harassment, were not finally determined. The Tribunal directed that the full merits hearing would decide whether those allegations were continuing acts and, if not, whether it was just and equitable to extend time.

Claims and outcomes

6 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The Tribunal refused the respondent's application to strike out the unfair dismissal claim on jurisdictional grounds. The unfair dismissal claim was not finally determined on its merits.	Other	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The claim was dismissed because it was not presented within the applicable time limit and it was reasonably practicable to present it in time.	Dismissed	—	—
Disability discrimination	Only the allegation of disability discrimination relating to an incident dated March 2020 was dismissed as out of time, with no just and equitable extension. The remainder of the disability discrimination allegations were left for the full merits hearing to determine on continuing act and time issues.	Dismissed	Disability	—
Race discrimination	The Tribunal did not finally determine the race discrimination allegations. It directed that the full merits hearing would determine whether the direct race discrimination and race harassment allegations were continuing acts and, if not, whether time should be extended.	Other	Race	—
Harassment	The disability harassment allegations, other than the March 2020 disability discrimination allegation dismissed as out of time, were left for the full merits hearing to determine on continuing act and time issues.	Other	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.