Case 3305441/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305441/2020
- Decision date
- 21 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge King Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Cambridge Employment Tribunal on 19 to 23 June 2023 before Employment Judge King. The claimant, Miss N Masih, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Miss Patterson. The written judgment records that the claimant’s claims for unfair dismissal, direct race discrimination, and a redundancy payment were each found not well founded and dismissed.
The written record does not set out the tribunal’s reasons in full. It states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record being sent to the parties. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment refers to this as a claim for direct race discrimination. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.