Case 3314948/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Tero v GXO Logistics UK Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3314948/2023
- Decision date
- 30 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham
- Panel members
- Mr C Grant, Ms S Elizabeth
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Tero
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss A Tero's claims against GXO Logistics UK Limited were heard at Bury St Edmunds by Employment Judge Graham, sitting with Mr C Grant and Ms S Elizabeth, on 14 to 17 April 2025. The tribunal dismissed the complaint of automatic constructive unfair dismissal and dismissed the complaint of direct disability discrimination.
The complaint of harassment related to disability succeeded in part. The written judgment record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing, but this extract does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasoning. It also records that no remedy hearing will be listed pending any application by the respondent for reconsideration.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as a complaint of automatic constructive unfair dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The complaint related to disability succeeded in part. The written record does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasons. | Other | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.