Case 6019149/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Sadique v DHL Services Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 6019149/2024
- Decision date
- 1 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Noons Appearances
- Venue
- Midlands West
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Z Sadique
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed all of the claimant's claims. The judgment records that all claims were presented outside the statutory time limits for such claims.
For the claims brought under the Employment Rights Act 1996, the Tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have issued the claims within the statutory time limits. For the Equality Act 2010 claims, the Tribunal found that the claims were out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that all claims were dismissed because they were presented outside statutory time limits, and refers to Employment Rights Act 1996 claims. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that all claims were dismissed because they were presented outside statutory time limits, and refers to Employment Rights Act 1996 claims. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that all claims were dismissed because they were presented outside statutory time limits. The short judgment does not give separate reasons for this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that all claims were dismissed because they were presented outside statutory time limits. The short judgment does not give separate reasons for this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the Equality Act 2010 claims were outside the statutory time limits and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.