Case 6009539/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Faisal Ali v Barik Sikandari and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6009539/2024
- Decision date
- 28 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Crosfill Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Faisal Ali
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 28 January 2025 before Employment Judge Crosfill Representation at East London Hearing Centre, the tribunal dealt with the Claimant's claims of unfair dismissal, unlawful deductions from wages, and wrongful dismissal. It struck out all three claims under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the Claimant had no reasonable prospects of showing either that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claims within three months or, if that were the case, that they had been presented within a reasonable period thereafter. The tribunal therefore held that the claims had been presented outside all relevant statutory time limits.
The Respondents' counterclaim was not pursued. The Respondents accepted that if the Claimant was not an employee the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear that claim, and it was dismissed upon withdrawal. The Respondents' application for costs was also dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the Claimant had no reasonable prospects of showing that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim within three months or, if it was, that he presented it within a reasonable period thereafter; the tribunal held the claim was outside the relevant statutory time limit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the Claimant had no reasonable prospects of showing that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim within three months or, if it was, that he presented it within a reasonable period thereafter; the tribunal held the claim was outside the relevant statutory time limit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Struck out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because the Claimant had no reasonable prospects of showing that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim within three months or, if it was, that he presented it within a reasonable period thereafter; the tribunal held the claim was outside the relevant statutory time limit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | The Respondents' counterclaim was not pursued. The Respondents accepted that if the Claimant was not an employee the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the counterclaim, and it was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- not reasonably practicable to present within three months
- reasonable period thereafter
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.