Case 2204164/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P. Mihaj v National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers and 6 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 2204164/2021
- Decision date
- 13 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkin
Parties
8 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary judgment at London Central before Employment Judge Adkin sitting alone on 12 October 2022. The extract records that the race discrimination claim under the Equality Act 2010 was struck out. It also states that all claims against the Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Respondents were struck out, but it does not identify the particular rule or basis for that order in the extracted text.
The tribunal made no strike out or deposit orders in respect of the disability discrimination and victimisation claims under the Equality Act 2010, the trade union detriment claim under TULRCA 1992, the unfair dismissal claim under the Employment Rights Act 1996, or the breach of contract claim. On the text provided, those claims therefore remained live after this hearing.
Reasons were given orally, and the judgment notes that the parties could request written reasons within 14 days. The extract does not contain any merits findings or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the race discrimination claim under the Equality Act 2010 is struck out. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | No strike out or deposit order was made in respect of this claim at this preliminary hearing. | Other | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | No strike out or deposit order was made in respect of this claim at this preliminary hearing. | Other | — | — |
| Trade union | The judgment records a trade union detriment claim under TULRCA 1992, but makes no strike out or deposit order in respect of it. | Other | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | No strike out or deposit order was made in respect of this claim at this preliminary hearing. | Other | — | — |
| Breach of contract | No strike out or deposit order was made in respect of this claim at this preliminary hearing. | Other | — | — |
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.