Case 2401239/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Shanu Varma v Peregrine International Limited and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 2401239/2025
- Decision date
- 12 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Humble Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss Shanu Varma
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningFollowing the hearing on 12 December 2025, the Tribunal recorded that the unfair dismissal claim against the second respondent was dismissed on withdrawal.
The Tribunal stated that the unfair dismissal claim against the first respondent, the discrimination claim, and the claims for holiday pay, wrongful dismissal and notice pay would proceed, some subject to clauses in the Order of 18 December 2025. The judgment does not set out factual findings, remedy, legal tests, or the protected characteristic for the discrimination claim.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim against the second respondent was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim against the first respondent was stated to proceed subject to clause 2.1(a) of the Order of 18 December 2025. | Other | — | — |
| Other | The judgment states that a discrimination claim shall proceed, but does not specify the protected characteristic or discrimination claim type. | Other | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for holiday pay was stated to proceed subject to clause 2.1(b) of the Order of 18 December 2025. | Other | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The claims for wrongful dismissal and notice pay were stated to proceed subject to clause 2.1(b) of the Order of 18 December 2025. | Other | — | — |
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.