Case 2206731/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2206731/2022
- Decision date
- 23 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gidney Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in London Central before Employment Judge Gidney on 23 August 2023, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by counsel. The tribunal struck out the claimant’s unfair dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim struck out at the preliminary hearing; no merits determination was made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Application to amend was granted to include disability discrimination under s15 Equality Act 2010 and failure to make reasonable adjustments under ss20-21; no merits determination was made at this hearing. | Other | Disability | — |
| Part-time worker regulations | Application to amend was granted to include an allegation of unfavourable treatment as a part-time worker in relation to dismissal; no merits determination was made at this hearing. | Other | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Application to amend was granted to include a race discrimination complaint in relation to dismissal; no merits determination was made at this hearing. | Other | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.