Case 3303375/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Mahajan v Virgin Atlantic Airways Limited and 1 other — 2026
- Case reference
- 3303375/2024
- Decision date
- 25 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr A Mahajan
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Shastri-Hurst struck out Mr Mahajan's complaint of direct discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation, identified at paragraph 11c of the Agreed List of Issues.
The judge rejected the respondent's application to strike out the harassment claim relating to sex and/or sexual orientation. This judgment did not determine the merits of that harassment claim. The claims of harassment related to race and religious belief were dismissed upon withdrawal. No monetary remedy is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sexual orientation discrimination | The direct discrimination complaint identified at paragraph 11c of the Agreed List of Issues was struck out. | Struck out | Sexual orientation | — |
| Harassment | The respondent's application to strike out the harassment claim relating to sex and/or sexual orientation was rejected. The underlying claim was not finally determined by this judgment. | Other | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The respondent's application to strike out the harassment claim relating to sex and/or sexual orientation was rejected. The underlying claim was not finally determined by this judgment. | Other | Sexual orientation | — |
| Harassment | The claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Harassment | The claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
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.