Case 3206058/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr D Kordrostami v Metro Bank plc — 2023

Case reference: 3206058/2022
Decision date: 7 June 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Gordon Walker

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr D Kordrostami

Respondent

Metro Bank plc

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a public hearing on 3 November 2023 before Employment Judge Gordon Walker, the tribunal dealt only with procedural matters on the listed issues. It struck out the allegation at paragraph 8.2.1 of the case management order list of issues under rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013.

The tribunal also recorded that the disability-related harassment claims at paragraphs 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 5.2.5 and 5.2.7 were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant under rule 52 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. No merits findings were made on those withdrawn claims in this judgment.

All other claims were left to proceed to a final hearing listed for 15, 16, 17, 18 and 22 October 2024. The judgment did not award any compensation or other monetary remedy.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The allegation at paragraph 8.2.1 of the list of issues was struck out under rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013. The extracted text does not identify the underlying legal label for this allegation.	Struck out	—	—
Harassment	The disability-related harassment claims at paragraphs 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 5.2.5 and 5.2.7 of the list of issues were dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant under rule 52 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.	Withdrawn	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

2 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.