Case 3303143/2024 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Kwame Arthur v LHR Airports Ltd RECORD OF AN OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2025

Case reference: 3303143/2024
Decision date: 4 March 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Alliott Appearances
Venue: Watford

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Kwame Arthur

Respondent

LHR Airports Ltd RECORD OF AN OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant applied to amend his claim to add direct race discrimination. Employment Judge Alliott applied the Selkent principles and allowed the amendment, finding the application was late but that the balance of hardship favoured the claimant. The judge noted the amendment added a new head of claim based on the same factual allegations, that the race point had not been raised in the disciplinary or appeal process, and that the respondent would still be able to take any time-limit point at the merits hearing.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Struck out under Rule 38(1)(a) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success.	Struck out	—	—
Race discrimination	Amendment to add direct race discrimination was allowed, but the race discrimination claim was later struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.	Struck out	Race	—
Sex discrimination	The sex discrimination claim was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.	Struck out	Sex	—

Legal tests applied

8 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.