Vol. I·6 May 2026

Search the index

Loading…

Loading page content.

Tribunal Watch

A structured, cross-cut index of UK employment tribunal decisions, built from the primary record at gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions. Independent of HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice.

Not legal advice. Information on this site is a matter of public record; it is not guidance on any individual case.

Editorial

About this site
Methodology
Corrections policy
Editorial standards

Rights & privacy

Open Government Licence v3.0
Privacy notice
Data subject requests
Atom feed (recent decisions)

Ms N Jiwanji & others (see attached schedules) v 1 East Coast Main Line Company Limited 2 London North Eastern Railway Limited 3 Hitachi Rail Europe Limited — Employment Tribunal 2022 | Tribunal Watch

Tribunal Watch/1 East Coast Main Line Company Limited 2 London North Eastern Railway Limited 3 Hitachi Rail Europe Limited/1802840/2018

Case 1802840/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Ms N Jiwanji & others (see attached schedules) v 1 East Coast Main Line Company Limited 2 London North Eastern Railway Limited 3 Hitachi Rail Europe Limited — 2022

Case reference: 1802840/2018
Decision date: 24 August 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Robertson
Venue: Leeds

Indexed: 30 April 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms N Jiwanji & others (see attached schedules)

Respondent

1 East Coast Main Line Company Limited 2 London North Eastern Railway Limited 3 Hitachi Rail Europe Limited

Claims brought

1 category

Trade union

Source tags (gov.uk)

Trade Union Membership and Trade Union Rights

Outcomes per claim are extracted in a second pass and are not yet published on this page.

Source document

Primary record

The full judgment is available on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Judgment 1 (PDF) ↗

Judgment 2 (PDF) ↗

Judgment 3 (PDF) ↗

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.