Case 3305179/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Ms S Khan v Air India Ltd — 2024

Case reference: 3305179/2023
Decision date: 6 June 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Dick Representation

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms S Khan

Respondent

Air India Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant, who lived in India, brought complaints against Air India Ltd arising from employment or an offer of employment in India. The tribunal proceeded with the hearing despite the claimant's inability to join the video hearing properly, refused her application to postpone or stay the case pending her attendance in the United Kingdom or appeals, and considered the respondent's applications for strike out and a stay.

The tribunal assumed for the purposes of the decision that, apart from the international nature of the claim, the non-contract complaints would otherwise have a reasonable prospect of success. It found that the claimant did not live in the United Kingdom, the respondent was not a British company, the events and contract formation took place in India, and the claimant had never worked in the United Kingdom. It concluded that the Equality Act 2010 and Employment Rights Act 1996 did not extend to the facts, so all complaints except the contract complaint were struck out.

For the contract complaint, the tribunal found that both the tribunal and the Indian courts had jurisdiction, but that India was clearly the more appropriate forum. It noted that the witnesses and relevant events were in India and that Indian law was likely to govern the contract, and stayed the contract complaint indefinitely.

Claims and outcomes

7 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Sex discrimination	Struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because the tribunal found no reasonable prospect that the territorial reach of the Equality Act 2010 extended to the facts of the case.	Struck out	Sex	—
Religion or belief discrimination	Struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because the tribunal found no reasonable prospect that the territorial reach of the Equality Act 2010 extended to the facts of the case.	Struck out	Religion or belief	—
Victimisation	Struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because the tribunal found no reasonable prospect that the territorial reach of the Equality Act 2010 extended to the facts of the case.	Struck out	—	—
Whistleblowing	Struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because the tribunal found no reasonable prospect that the territorial reach of the Employment Rights Act 1996 extended to the facts of the case.	Struck out	—	—
Unfair dismissal	Struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because the tribunal found no reasonable prospect that the territorial reach of the Employment Rights Act 1996 extended to the facts of the case.	Struck out	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The judgment described this as an Employment Rights Act 1996 complaint for other payments. It was struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because the tribunal found no reasonable prospect that the territorial reach of the ERA extended to the facts of the case.

Legal tests applied

6 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.