Case 3302333/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Khalid Mughal v Omnia Life Style Ltd and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 3302333/2023
- Decision date
- 15 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reindorf KC
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Khalid Mughal
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing for case management before Employment Judge Reindorf KC. The respondent had applied to strike out the claimant's age discrimination claim, or alternatively for a deposit order, on the basis that it was inadequately particularised. The order records that the strike-out application was unsuccessful and that judgment on that application was sent separately.
The order set case management directions, including provision of a schedule of loss, and completed the list of issues for the final hearing. The remaining issues include time limits, unfair dismissal, direct age discrimination, harassment related to age, remedies, and any adjustment for failure to comply with the ACAS Code.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The preliminary hearing order lists unfair dismissal issues for a final hearing but does not determine the complaint. | Other | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The respondent's strike-out application for the age discrimination claim was unsuccessful, but the discrimination complaint itself was not finally determined in this order. | Other | Age | — |
| Harassment | The order records harassment related to age as an issue for determination; it does not decide the harassment complaint. | Other | Age | — |
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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.