Case 3307815/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Gurpal Singh Sidhu v International Distribution Services Ltd PRELIMINARY HEARING (in public) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3307815/2023
- Decision date
- 2 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Gurpal Singh Sidhu
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in public on 19 January 2024 before Employment Judge Bedeau, Mr Gurpal Singh Sidhu's claims against International Distribution Services Ltd were struck out as being an abuse of process and because they were out of time. The order records that the hearing was at Reading Employment Tribunal by Cloud Video Platform and that the respondent was represented by Ms S Percival, Solicitor.
The tribunal also held that the settlement agreement entered into on or around 12 October 2022 was valid. It found there was no misrepresentation and that contract estoppel applied. No monetary award was made in the written order.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out at a preliminary hearing as an abuse of process and because the claims were out of time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Struck out at a preliminary hearing as an abuse of process and because the claims were out of time. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Breach of contract | Struck out at a preliminary hearing as an abuse of process and because the claims were out of time. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- contract estoppel
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.