Case 2303054/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Randa v Abellio London Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2303054/2018
- Decision date
- 20 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
- Panel members
- Ms H Bharadia, Mr J Turley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Randa
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal unanimously dismissed the claimant's race discrimination claim under the Equality Act 2010.
The Tribunal unanimously upheld the claimant's unfair dismissal claim under the Employment Rights Act 1996, finding that the dismissal was unfair. The judgment records that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the claim of race discrimination contrary to the Equality Act 2010 fails and is dismissed. No written reasons are included in the supplied judgment text. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claim of unfair dismissal contrary to the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeds and that the dismissal was unfair. No remedy is stated in the supplied judgment text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Equality Act 2010
- Employment Rights Act 1996
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.