Case 1802409/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Bahra v Leeds Trinity University — 2024
- Case reference
- 1802409/2024
- Decision date
- 23 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies. She
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Bahra
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant emailed the Tribunal on 29 July 2024 saying she wished to withdraw the case because of her health and recovery. In that email she also said she had taken advice about a case for disability discrimination, and that if she later felt she had experienced further discrimination she would seek help from the courts. The Tribunal later treated the claimant's 24 August 2024 email as a timely application under regulation 10A(2) for the Legal Officer's dismissal of 16 August 2024 to be considered afresh.
On fresh consideration, Employment Judge Davies applied rule 51 and rule 52 of Schedule 1 to the 2013 Regulations. The Tribunal held that the 29 July 2024 email was an unequivocal withdrawal of the claim and that the claimant had not expressed a wish at the time of withdrawal to reserve the right to bring the same or substantially the same complaint again. The phrase 'further discrimination' was read as referring to additional acts, not the existing claim.
The result was that the claim remained dismissed, and in the alternative the Tribunal upheld the Legal Officer's judgment to that effect. The judgment did not determine any substantive discrimination or whistleblowing allegations on their merits, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal did not determine the merits of any substantive claim type. It considered whether the claimant had withdrawn the case and held that the withdrawal was unequivocal, so the claim was dismissed under rule 52; the judgment also upheld the Legal Officer's earlier dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Regulation 10A(2) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 51 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Rule 52 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust [2006] EWCA Civ 1087
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.