Case 3311673/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Donia Demetriou v LHR Airports Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3311673/2023
- Decision date
- 19 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Donia Demetriou
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that it could not consider the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal because the complaint was presented outside the applicable time limit. The judgment records that it was reasonably practicable to present the complaint in time.
The tribunal also held that it could not consider the claimant's complaints made pursuant to the Equality Act 2010 because they were presented outside the applicable time limits. It found that it was not just and equitable to extend time. No remedy was awarded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal stated it could not consider the unfair dismissal complaint because it was presented outside the time limit and it was reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment refers generally to complaints made pursuant to the Equality Act 2010 being out of time. The disability discrimination classification is taken from the listing categories, as the judgment itself does not break down the Equality Act complaints by protected characteristic. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment refers generally to complaints made pursuant to the Equality Act 2010 being out of time. The race discrimination classification is taken from the listing categories, as the judgment itself does not break down the Equality Act complaints by protected characteristic. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment refers generally to complaints made pursuant to the Equality Act 2010 being out of time. The religion or belief discrimination classification is taken from the listing categories, as the judgment itself does not break down the Equality Act complaints by protected characteristic. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
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.