Case 3327729/2017 · Employment Tribunal
In person For all v Mr J French-Williams, Solicitor — 2019
- Case reference
- 3327729/2017
- Decision date
- 22 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ord Members
- Venue
- Huntingdon
- Panel members
- Mrs K L Johnson, Mr A Schooler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For all
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Huntingdon on 15, 16, 17 and 18 April 2019 before Employment Judge Ord, with lay members Mrs K L Johnson and Mr A Schooler. The claimant, Mr H S Fullah, appeared in person. The respondents were represented by Mr J French-Williams, solicitor. Oral reasons were given at the hearing, and the written record states that the judgment was unanimous.
The tribunal held that Mr Fullah was not unfairly dismissed contrary to section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It also held that he was not victimised contrary to section 27 of the Equality Act 2010. As a result, all of the claimant's complaints were dismissed against all respondents.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Victimisation | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.27 Equality Act 2010
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.