Case 3314616/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Woodall v Imran Zaman — 2020
- Case reference
- 3314616/2019
- Decision date
- 25 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lang
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Woodall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss S Woodall was employed by Imran Zaman from 2 May 2018 to 15 March 2019 as a housekeeper. In a claim form dated 8 May 2019 she brought complaints of unfair dismissal, unauthorised deductions from wages, and unpaid holiday pay. The tribunal wrote to her on 4 August 2019 indicating that, because she had less than two years' service, it proposed to strike out the unfair dismissal complaint. No response was received.
At the hearing on 6 March 2020 neither party attended. The tribunal recorded attempts to contact the claimant, but the telephone number she had given appeared to have been disconnected. Employment Judge Lang struck out the unfair dismissal complaint on the basis that the claimant had less than two years' service. The remaining complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages and holiday pay were dismissed pursuant to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out on the basis that the claimant had less than two years' service and the claim had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed pursuant to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed pursuant to rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
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.