Case 3315290/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Chaudary v Sainsburys Supermarkets Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3315290/2020
- Decision date
- 21 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Chaudary
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case in public by video at Watford Employment Tribunal on 20 and 21 January 2022, before Employment Judge Quill sitting alone. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The judgment records that the unfair dismissal claim was not well-founded and was dismissed. The breach of contract claims also failed and were dismissed.
The age discrimination complaints had been withdrawn in writing before the hearing. They were dismissed upon withdrawal. Reasons were given orally, with written reasons to be provided only if requested within the stated period.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the unfair dismissal claim was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claims of breach of contract failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The judgment states that the age discrimination complaints had been withdrawn in writing before the hearing and were dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.