Case 3303939/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Gheorghiu v Superdrug Stores plc — 2026
- Case reference
- 3303939/2024
- Decision date
- 29 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Gheorghiu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimant was not dismissed by the respondent, either within the definition of dismissal in section 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 or at all. The complaint of unfair dismissal was therefore not well-founded and was dismissed.
The tribunal also stated that none of the complaints of sex discrimination set out in the list of issues succeeded. It noted that complaints related to alleged dismissal were in time, but because all claims failed on their merits, it did not need to make more detailed decisions on time limits or address remedy issues.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was not dismissed by the respondent, either under section 95(1)(c) ERA 1996 or at all, and dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that none of the complaints of sex discrimination, as set out in paragraph 4 of the list of issues, succeeded. Written reasons were not provided in the text. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 95(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.