Case 2300863/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Z Khan, Claimant’s friend v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 2300863/2018
- Decision date
- 27 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harrington JUDGMENT
- Venue
- Croydon
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr Z Khan, Claimant’s friend
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing at Croydon on 11 November 2019 before Employment Judge Harrington. The written judgment dated 27 December 2019 records that, following the dissolution of the Third and Fourth Respondents, the Claimant's claims against those respondents were dismissed upon withdrawal. The decision does not set out any substantive findings on liability for the underlying claims in this written record.
The tribunal also refused the Claimant's application for costs. No monetary award is recorded, and the judgment does not allocate any sum to particular claims. The written note states that reasons were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
The written record does not identify the individual lay members, and it does not list the precise legal tests applied in the oral reasons. On the face of the written judgment, the only recorded outcomes are the dismissal upon withdrawal of the claims against the Third and Fourth Respondents and the refusal of costs.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records that, following the dissolution of the Third and Fourth Respondents, the Claimant's claims against them were dismissed upon withdrawal. It does not identify the underlying claim types in this written record. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.