Case 3302464/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Daron Jackson v British Airways plc — 2025
- Case reference
- 3302464/2024
- Decision date
- 27 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Chudleigh Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Daron Jackson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claim was presented before the end of the period of three months beginning with the effective date of termination, and that it would have been reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented within that three-month period.
The tribunal concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the claim and struck it out in its entirety. No remedy was awarded. The short judgment does not separately set out findings for the unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages categories identified in the listing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The gov.uk listing identifies unfair dismissal. The judgment itself refers to the claim in the singular and states it was struck out in its entirety for lack of jurisdiction; it does not separately analyse claim types. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The gov.uk listing identifies unlawful deduction from wages. The judgment itself refers to the claim in the singular and states it was struck out in its entirety for lack of jurisdiction; it does not separately analyse this head of claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- reasonably practicable
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.