Case 3220330/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Bastani-Boshehri v Oasis Dental Care Ltd – T/A Bupa Dental Care Heard by Cloud video — 2021
- Case reference
- 3220330/2020
- Decision date
- 9 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reed
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Bastani-Boshehri
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary judgment heard by Employment Judge Reed sitting alone by Cloud video on 3 September 2021. The claimant was represented by Mrs S Khaliq and the respondent by Ms R Kight.
The tribunal held that the claimant was not granted leave to amend her claim to allege anything other than sex discrimination. The judgment does not set out any substantive findings on liability; it records only the scope of the claim that would continue.
The sole claims of sex discrimination going forward were those referred to at paragraph 20(a), (b) and (d) of the claimant’s undated further and better particulars. No remedy was assessed or awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal did not determine the merits of the sex discrimination claims in this judgment. It refused leave to amend to allege anything other than sex discrimination, and recorded that the claims going forward were those referred to at paragraph 20(a), (b) and (d) of the claimant’s further and better particulars. | Other | Sex | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.