Case 3303358/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Shankar Sinniah v Arriva London North Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3303358/2021
- Decision date
- 10 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchings
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Shankar Sinniah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr Shankar Sinniah, brought claims against Arriva London North Ltd described in the judgment as claims for redundancy, notice and other payments. The matter was heard by CVP at Cambridge Employment Tribunal on 17 May 2022 before Employment Judge Hutchings sitting alone.
Pursuant to Rule 27(1) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, as amended in October 2021, and after considering written and oral submissions from both parties under Rule 27(3), the Tribunal struck out the claims. The stated reason was that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claims.
The judgment records no monetary award and no remedy breakdown. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, with written reasons to be provided only if requested within the relevant time limit.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the claim for redundancy was struck out because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment refers to notice payments and the listing category identifies breach of contract. The judgment struck out the claim for notice payments because the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to other payments and the listing category identifies unlawful deduction from wages. The precise nature of the other payments is not set out in the short judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 27(1) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 27(3) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.