Case 2207979/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Sultana Choudhry v The Alan Turing Institute Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2207979/2023
- Decision date
- 10 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heydon REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Sultana Choudhry
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing held by CVP in London Central on 4 September 2025 before Employment Judge Heydon. The respondent, The Alan Turing Institute Ltd, applied to strike out the claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a) or (b) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success, or alternatively because the claimant's conduct of the proceedings had been unreasonable.
The tribunal refused that application. The judgment does not record any substantive findings on the underlying claims, and it does not determine liability, dismissal, discrimination, whistleblowing, or any remedy. The only outcome recorded is that the strike-out application failed, so the case was not removed at this stage.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | This was a preliminary hearing. The judgment determined only the respondent's application to strike out the claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a) or (b); it did not decide the substantive claims on their merits. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(a) or (b)
- no reasonable prospect of success
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.