Case 1400750/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Chengelli v GR Retail Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1400750/2022
- Decision date
- 31 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray AND
- Venue
- Southampton
- Panel members
- Mr Sleeth, Mr Wakeman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Chengelli
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Southampton on 12 to 13 July 2023 before Employment Judge Gray and lay members Mr Sleeth and Mr Wakeman. The claimant was Mrs S Chengelli and the respondent was GR Retail Ltd. The judgment records that the tribunal heard the case with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by a litigation consultant.
The unanimous judgment was that the complaints for unfair constructive dismissal and direct sex discrimination failed and were dismissed. The wording used in the judgment is brief and does not set out separate findings of fact or a remedy calculation, so no monetary award was made.
Written reasons were not provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record notes that any further reasons would only be provided if requested in accordance with the tribunal's usual procedure.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as a complaint for unfair constructive dismissal and states that it failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment records a complaint of direct sex discrimination and states that it failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
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.