Case 2410055/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Kerr v American Airlines — 2019
- Case reference
- 2410055/2019
- Decision date
- 20 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hoey Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Kerr
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which the respondent did not present a response within the timescale set. The Employment Judge stated that, in the absence of a response, the claim succeeds and that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled would be determined at a later remedy hearing.
The judgment also records that the hearing listed for 5 November 2019 was changed to a remedy hearing before an Employment Judge sitting alone to determine what, if any, remedy the claimant was entitled to receive. No substantive findings on liability beyond the Rule 21 default position, and no monetary award, are set out in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not identify the claim types individually; this is inferred from the gov.uk listing categories and the statement that 'the claim succeeds' under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment does not identify the claim types individually; this is inferred from the gov.uk listing categories and the statement that 'the claim succeeds' under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.