Case 6006654/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Allen v LHR Airports Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6006654/2025
- Decision date
- 27 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S. Matthews Representation
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Allen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr N Allen's unfair dismissal claim against LHR Airports Limited was dismissed at the hearing on 27 July 2026. The tribunal found that the claim had not been presented within the applicable time limit and that it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time.
The tribunal also dismissed the direct race discrimination claim because it had been presented outside the applicable time limit. It found that extending that limit was not just and equitable. Both dismissals were based on time limits; the judgment records no determination of the merits or monetary award. Summary reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed as out of time. The tribunal found that presenting the claim within the applicable time limit was reasonably practicable. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination claim dismissed as out of time. The tribunal found that extending the time limit was not just and equitable. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Reasonably practicable to present the unfair dismissal claim within the applicable time limit
- Just and equitable extension of time for the direct race discrimination claim
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.