Case 3310995/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Remeuz v British Airways plc — 2024
- Case reference
- 3310995/2022
- Decision date
- 14 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bansal
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary issue hearing before Employment Judge Bansal sitting alone on 5 December 2023. The tribunal considered whether the claimant had a disability within the meaning of s6 Equality Act 2010 during the material period from 21 October 2021 to 30 May 2022.
The tribunal found that the claimant did not have a disability within the meaning of s6 Equality Act 2010 for that period. On that basis, it held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the complaint of disability discrimination, and that complaint was dismissed.
The judgment records that the claimant’s claim for notice pay continues, so the tribunal did not determine that issue in this decision. The written record of the decision was sent to the parties on 14 January 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found that, at the material times between 21 October 2021 and 30 May 2022, the claimant did not have a disability within the meaning of s6 Equality Act 2010, so it had no jurisdiction to consider the disability discrimination complaint. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s6 Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.