Case 2210370/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms F Zaidi 1st v Insight investment Management Limited 2nd Respondent: Bank of New York Mellon — 2024
- Case reference
- 2210370/2023
- Decision date
- 29 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicolle Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms F Zaidi 1st
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing heard by CVP on 19 February 2024 before Employment Judge Nicolle. The only matter decided in the written judgment was the respondents' application for a costs award under Rule 76(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The tribunal held that the respondents' costs claim succeeded and ordered Ms F Zaidi to pay the respondents £500. The judgment states that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that the respondents requested written reasons, which were to be provided as soon as reasonably practicable.
No substantive employment claims were determined in this judgment, and no discrimination, dismissal, wages, or working time findings were made. The only recorded financial outcome is the £500 costs order payable by 18 March 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal decided the respondents' application for a costs award under Rule 76(1)(a) at a preliminary hearing on 19 February 2024 and ordered the claimant to pay £500 by 18 March 2024. | Upheld | — | £500 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £500
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 76(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.