Case 2304959/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr I A Chandel v Northfield Farm Ltd — 2024

Case reference: 2304959/2022
Decision date: 10 January 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Tsamados

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr I A Chandel

Respondent

Northfield Farm Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a preliminary hearing in public before Employment Judge Tsamados, sitting alone, on 10 January 2024 at London South Croydon by CVP. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr E McFarlane.

The tribunal struck out the claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success. The written record does not set out substantive findings on the merits of the pleaded issues.

The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing. It also states that written reasons would not be provided unless a party asked for them at the hearing or made a written request within 14 days of the sending of the written record.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The written judgment records a single strike-out of the claim under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success; it does not give separate reasoning for individual claims.	Struck out	—	—
Whistleblowing	The case was listed by gov.uk as including Public Interest Disclosure. The written judgment itself records only that the claim was struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) and does not separate the pleaded issues.	Struck out	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.