Case 3311110/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person and K Gura (lay representative) For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 3311110/2022
- Decision date
- 28 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anderson Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person and K Gura (lay representative) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe written record records that the claimant, D Singh, brought a claim of unfair dismissal against British Airways PLC. The hearing was before Employment Judge Anderson at Watford by CVP on 27 and 28 March 2024, with the claimant appearing in person and with K Gura as lay representative, and the respondent represented by G Baker of counsel.
The judgment states that the claimant’s unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. No further factual findings, legal analysis, or remedy calculation are set out in the written record provided. The record also notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. The only substantive recorded outcome is that the claimant’s unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. | 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.