Case 2307190/2020 · Employment Tribunal
A Ghumman v The Lady Eleanor Holles School — 2022
- Case reference
- 2307190/2020
- Decision date
- 28 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- C Wilby, C Rogers
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A Ghumman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at London South on 23, 24, 25 and 30 May and 28 June 2022, gave a unanimous judgment dismissing the claimant’s breach of contract claim and his claims of sex, race, religion/belief and sexual orientation discrimination against The Lady Eleanor Holles School.
The written record states that the claimant lost the claims for substantially the reasons given in the separate Deposit Order, and that he had acted unreasonably in pursuing them. On that basis the tribunal ordered the £250 deposit to be paid to the respondent and ordered the claimant to pay the respondent’s costs in the sum of £6,900 including VAT, less the £250 deposit.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Race discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Sexual orientation discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,650
- across all upheld claims
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.