Case 3322410/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Zanetti v Société Air France — 2020
- Case reference
- 3322410/2019
- Decision date
- 14 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn a short judgment dated 14 May 2020, Employment Judge Anstis recorded that Ms V Zanetti's race discrimination claim, redundancy payment claim, notice pay claim, and claim concerning non-payment of her language allowance were all dismissed on withdrawal. The judgment describes the notice pay claim as excluding pension contributions, travel benefits, and refunds that would have accrued during the notice period.
The claimant's alleged personal data breach was dismissed because it was not within the jurisdiction of the employment tribunal. The judgment contains no merits findings on the withdrawn claims and records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Redundancy | Dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim; the judgment states it excluded pension contributions, travel benefits, or refunds that would have accrued during the notice period. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim described as non-payment of the claimant's language allowance; dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Alleged personal data breach dismissed because it was not within the jurisdiction of the employment tribunal. | 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.