Case 3301899/2024 · Employment Tribunal
A B v British Airways plc — 2026
- Case reference
- 3301899/2024
- Decision date
- 7 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Members
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Mrs A E Brown, Mr F Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A B
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal sat at Reading before Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto with members Mrs A E Brown and Mr F Wright. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent, British Airways plc, was represented by Miss H Kendrick, solicitor.
The judgment records that the claimant's complaints of direct sex discrimination, directive associative disability discrimination, automatic unfair dismissal under section 104C of the Employment Rights Act 1996, direct religion and belief discrimination, and harassment related to religion were not well founded and were dismissed.
The written record states that summary reasons were given orally at the hearing. No written reasons or remedy findings are included in the supplied judgment, and no monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The judgment records a complaint of direct sex discrimination as not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records the complaint as "directive associative disability discrimination"; it was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records a complaint of automatic unfair dismissal under section 104C Employment Rights Act 1996 as not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment records a complaint of direct religion and belief discrimination as not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | The judgment records a complaint of harassment related to religion as not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 104C Employment Rights Act 1996
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.