Case 6008877/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Abdelazim v Ceder Hope Care Services Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008877/2024
- Decision date
- 23 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Representation
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Abdelazim
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Reading hearing on 6, 7 and 8 October 2025, Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto dismissed the claimant’s disability discrimination complaints and his unfair dismissal complaint. The tribunal found that Mr Abdelazim was not a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was not dismissed. On that basis, the unfair dismissal complaint was not well founded. The written record notes that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found that the claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 and dismissed the disability discrimination complaints. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was not dismissed, so the unfair dismissal complaint was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.