Case 3207904/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Vadera v Uber London Ltd, Uber B.v. — 2022
- Case reference
- 3207904/2021
- Decision date
- 6 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Illing Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Vadera
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 24 June 2022, Employment Judge Illing considered the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction of wages, and non-payment of holiday pay against Uber London Ltd and Uber B.V.
The Tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaints made by the claimant. The judgment then states that, insofar as the Tribunal had jurisdiction, the claims were dismissed. No separate substantive findings or remedy assessment are recorded in the written judgment.
The decision was promulgated on 6 July 2022. No lay members are listed, and no legal test is expressly cited in the text provided.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | At the preliminary hearing the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | At the preliminary hearing the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | At the preliminary hearing the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.