Case 2403129/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs O Sohail v Tech Mahindra Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2403129/2022
- Decision date
- 9 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne Representatives
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs O Sohail
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Liverpool on 5 May 2023, Employment Judge Horne heard from Mrs O Sohail, who appeared in person. Tech Mahindra did not appear and was not represented.
The one-page judgment records only that the claims were struck out. It does not give separate reasons for the strike out and records no monetary award or other remedy. The decision was sent to the parties on 9 May 2023.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The PDF judgment states only that the claims were struck out at a preliminary hearing; this claim head is taken from the GOV.UK listing for the decision. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | The PDF judgment states only that the claims were struck out at a preliminary hearing; this claim head is taken from the GOV.UK listing for the decision. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The PDF judgment states only that the claims were struck out at a preliminary hearing; this claim head is taken from the GOV.UK listing for the decision. | Struck out | Religion or belief | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The PDF judgment states only that the claims were struck out at a preliminary hearing; this claim head is taken from the GOV.UK listing for the decision. | Struck out | — | — |
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.