Case 2302305/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Chuhan v Hermes Parcelnet Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2302305/2019
- Decision date
- 2 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cheetham QC
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Chuhan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing concerned the Claimant's application to amend his claim by adding a complaint that he was dismissed by reason of making protected disclosures and removing a complaint of race discrimination. The Claimant said he had ticked race discrimination on the claim form but had later received advice that the pleaded claim was really one of whistleblowing.
The Tribunal reviewed the particulars of claim and identified seven alleged protected disclosures already set out in the pleaded chronology. The Respondent's representative accepted that matters had been pleaded that could amount to protected disclosures, while whether they actually did so was left for the final hearing.
Employment Judge Cheetham QC allowed the amendment, describing the case as one where a litigant in person had provided proper particulars but used the wrong label. The Tribunal stated that the alleged matters were capable of falling within Employment Rights Act 1996 s.43B(1)(a), (b) or (d), with the questions of qualifying disclosures and the reason or principal reason for dismissal to be decided at the final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The Tribunal allowed the Claimant to amend his claim to add a complaint that he was dismissed by reason of making protected disclosures. The merits of the complaint were expressly left for the final hearing. | Other | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The Tribunal allowed the amendment removing the race discrimination complaint after the Claimant explained he had used the wrong label on the claim form. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Rights Act 1996 s.43B(1)(a), (b) or (d)
- qualifying disclosures
- principal reason
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.