Case 4102133/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Member M McAllister Tribunal Member J McCullagh Ms A Vial v Represented by: Ms S Ossei Mr S Alsafar — 2022
- Case reference
- 4102133/2022
- Decision date
- 20 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Murphy
- Venue
- Dundee
- Panel members
- M McAllister, J McCullagh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Member M McAllister Tribunal Member J McCullagh Ms A Vial
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe listed final hearing was converted on 17 October 2022 into a public preliminary hearing because the respondent, through Mr Hoyle, raised a preliminary issue that he was not the claimant's employer and that she had instead been employed by Mazaj Dundee Ltd, of which he said he was a director. The claimant agreed to proceed after an adjournment to consider the point and obtain advice. The tribunal heard evidence from the claimant, her former colleague Amanda Heath, and the respondent, with an interpreter attending by video link to assist the respondent.
The tribunal determined that the claimant was employed at all material times by the respondent. The written reasons record that the hearing was concerned with the correct identity of the claimant's employer, and that the tribunal's determination resolved that issue in the claimant's favour. Oral reasons were given at the hearing, and written reasons for the employer determination were requested and were to be issued later. No merits decision or remedy is recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Public preliminary hearing on the correct identity of the claimant's employer. The respondent said the claimant was employed by Mazaj Dundee Ltd, not by him; the tribunal held that the claimant was employed at all material times by the respondent. | Upheld | — | — |
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
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.