Case 2302137/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N J Beefnah v Easyjet Airline Company Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2302137/2022
- Decision date
- 19 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McLaren
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N J Beefnah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal struck out the claim after being informed that the claimant had not made any contact with his former employers since 18 September 2023. The Tribunal said the case was struck out because the claimant had not complied with the Order of the Tribunal dated 11 August 2023 and because it had not been actively pursued.
The judgment records no hearing on the merits and no findings on liability for the underlying claims. It also states that the hearing listed for 15 to 19 July 2024 would be vacated and would not take place.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that 'the claim' was struck out for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 11 August 2023 and because it had not been actively pursued. The underlying case listing identifies unfair dismissal as one of the claims, but the judgment does not separate the outcome by claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that 'the claim' was struck out for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 11 August 2023 and because it had not been actively pursued. The underlying case listing identifies disability discrimination as one of the claims, but the judgment does not separate the outcome by claim. | Struck out | Disability | — |
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.