Case 2411827/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr F Saleem v Menzies Aviation (UK) Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2411827/2018
- Decision date
- 24 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Whittaker
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mrs A Jarvis, Mr P Stowe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr F Saleem
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim that he was unfairly/constructively dismissed contrary to the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The Tribunal also dismissed the claimant's eight claims in Schedule B alleging victimisation contrary to section 27 of the Equality Act 2010. The written judgment records only the outcomes; reasons were given orally at the hearing and no written reasons are included in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as the claimant's claim that he was unfairly/constructively dismissed contrary to the Employment Rights Act 1996; it failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment states that the claimant's eight claims in Schedule B alleging victimisation contrary to section 27 of the Equality Act 2010 failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 27 Equality Act 2010
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.