Case 3305972/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs Gemma Stoate v British Airways plc — 2019

Case reference: 3305972/2018
Decision date: 1 November 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge McNeill QC
Venue: Watford

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs Gemma Stoate

Respondent

British Airways plc

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal upheld the claimant's claim that British Airways plc acted in breach of contract by not granting her voluntary redundancy. It awarded the claimant £14,914 as damages for breach of contract.

The judgment records that all of the claimant's remaining claims were dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written judgment does not set out further findings or legal analysis.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Breach of contract	The judgment states the respondent acted in breach of contract in not granting the claimant voluntary redundancy.	Upheld	—	£14,914
Redundancy	Gov.uk listed redundancy, but the short judgment only identifies breach of contract concerning voluntary redundancy and states the remainder of the claims are dismissed; the precise formulation of any separate redundancy claim is not set out.	Dismissed	—	—
Unfair dismissal	Gov.uk listed unfair dismissal and the judgment states the remainder of the claimant's claims are dismissed, but it does not separately particularise this claim.	Dismissed	—	—
Working time regulations	Gov.uk listed Working Time Regulations and the judgment states the remainder of the claimant's claims are dismissed, but it does not separately particularise this claim.	Dismissed	—	—

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £14,914; across all upheld claims

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.

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.