Case 1304381/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Sukhraj Bir Singh v Onside Youth Zones Limited R2) Wolverhampton Youth Zone T/A The Way Youth Zone — 2025
- Case reference
- 1304381/2024
- Decision date
- 31 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hussain REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Midlands West
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Sukhraj Bir Singh
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe written judgment records only a procedural order: by consent and pursuant to rule 35 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, the first respondent, Onside Youth Zones Limited, was removed as a party to the proceedings. The hearing was before Employment Judge Hussain at the Midlands West Employment Tribunal on 19 August 2025, and the judgment was approved on 31 August 2025.
No substantive findings, liability decision, or remedy award are set out in the extracted text. The notes state that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so the supplied record does not contain the tribunal's reasoning on any discrimination or other claim.
On the material available in this extract, there is no recorded adjudication of the merits against the remaining respondent, Wolverhampton Youth Zone T/A The Way Youth Zone, and no monetary award is identified.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The written record only records that, by consent and under rule 35 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, the first respondent was removed as a party. No substantive claim outcome is stated in the extracted text, and the oral reasons are not provided in this record. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 35 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.