Case 3202023/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Alom v Financial Conduct Authority — 2019
- Case reference
- 3202023/2018
- Decision date
- 3 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Prichard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Alom
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a judgment on withdrawal under rule 52. It records that Mr J Alom was the claimant and The Financial Conduct Authority was the respondent.
The Employment Tribunal dismissed the proceedings following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. The judgment contains no findings on the merits and no remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant; the claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, as the judgment text itself does not set out the pleaded issues. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant; the claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, as the judgment text itself does not set out the pleaded issues. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant; the claim type is taken from the gov.uk listing category, as the judgment text itself does not set out the pleaded issues. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 52
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.