Case 1800717/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Saleh v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1800717/2019
- Decision date
- 17 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Saleh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal gave judgment on the claimant's application to amend his claim. It allowed the complaints of disability discrimination brought under the Equality Act 2010 to proceed by amendment.
The tribunal refused the proposed claim for breach of contract by way of wrongful dismissal under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written judgment does not set out the tribunal's reasoning or any remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant's application to amend his claim to include complaints of disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 was allowed. It does not determine the substantive merits of those complaints. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment records that the claimant's application to amend his claim to include a breach of contract claim by way of wrongful dismissal was refused. It does not determine the substantive merits of a wrongful dismissal claim. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.