Case 3334883/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 3334883/2018
- Decision date
- 29 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Loy Members
- Panel members
- Mr S Bury, Mr T Maclean
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Watford hybrid hearing on 26 to 28 July 2021, the tribunal determined three claims brought by Mr A Verma against ENGIE FM Ltd. The breach of contract claim relating to hotel accommodation expenses was allowed by consent, and the respondent was ordered to pay £46.00.
The separate breach of contract claim for lunch expenses of £4.40 was rejected as not well-founded. The tribunal also rejected the age discrimination claim, recording that the respondent had not contravened section 39(2)(c) or (d) of the Equality Act 2010.
In addition to the claim outcomes, the tribunal made a costs order under Rule 76 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, requiring the claimant to pay the respondent £1,400 in respect of the respondent’s costs.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | By consent, the claim for breach of contract in respect of failure to pay hotel accommodation expenses succeeded. | Upheld | — | £46 |
| Breach of contract | The claim for breach of contract in respect of lunch expenses of £4.40 was found not well-founded and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The tribunal held that the respondent had not contravened section 39(2)(c) or (d) of the Equality Act 2010, so the age discrimination claim failed. | Dismissed | Age | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £46
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 39(2)(c) or (d) Equality Act 2010
- Rule 76 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.