Sector Report
Transport & Logistics Tribunal Data Analysis
Latest legal precedents and outcome patterns in the Transport & Logistics sector based on our 12-month database analysis.
347Cases Analysed (Last 12 Months)
Historical Transport & Logistics decisions from our database catalogue.
43%Success Factor
Proportion of claims won or split/upheld in our database.
57%Dismissal Rate
Claims lost or struck out due to procedural/jurisdictional issues.
↑ Strongest IndicatorUnfair Dismissal and Disability Discrimination (67% Success)
↓ Weakest IndicatorDiscrimination (14% Success)
Search by Claim Type
Showing 23 cases from the last 2 months.
3204647/2022 • 14 Jul 2026
split
The claimant succeeded on three harassment claims but lost all other claims, including constructive unfair dismissal and most reasonable adjustment and discrimination complaints.
Legal Issues (7)
- Time limits under section 123 Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable extension
- harassment related to disability
- reasonable adjustments
- discrimination arising from disability
- victimisation
- constructive unfair dismissal.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
6002570/2025 • 3 Jul 2026
lost
The disability discrimination claims were found to be unfounded and dismissed.
Legal Issues (1)
- Disability discrimination under sections 13 (direct discrimination) and 15 (discrimination arising from disability) of the Equality Act 2010; claimant's application for recusal dismissed; tribunal found claimant was disabled.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3311709/2024 • 2 Jul 2026
jurisdiction_dismissal
The claims of unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages, and whistleblowing were dismissed for want of jurisdiction as they were presented out of time and the claimant failed to establish valid presentation or grounds for an extension.
Legal Issues (1)
- Jurisdiction; time limits for presenting claims; validity of presentation by email and post; application of reasonably practicable and just and equitable tests for extension of time.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
6007488 • 23 Jun 2026
won
The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was upheld because the respondent did not attend and the tribunal found the dismissal was unfair, awarding compensation for loss of earnings, notice pay, and holiday pay.
Legal Issues (1)
- Unfair dismissal under section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996; redundancy; notice pay; holiday pay; recoupment of benefits.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
1603212/2025 • 23 Jun 2026
other
The unfair dismissal claim was struck out due to insufficient qualifying service, the whistleblowing claim was withdrawn, and the discrimination claims continue to a final hearing; the claimant was found to be disabled due to depression.
Legal Issues (2)
- Determination of disability status under section 6 Equality Act 2010
- including substantial adverse effect and long-term nature; consideration of a deposit order and amendment to include reasonable adjustments.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
6021704/2024 • 22 Jun 2026
other
The claim was brought outside the primary time limit but the tribunal exercised its discretion to allow it to proceed on just and equitable grounds.
Legal Issues (1)
- Time limit for presenting a discrimination claim under s.123 Equality Act 2010; discretion to extend on just and equitable grounds.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
6019034/2024 • 18 Jun 2026
lost
The tribunal found no evidence that any of the alleged treatments were because of or related to the claimant's Polish nationality; all complaints were either struck out for lack of jurisdiction or dismissed as not well-founded.
Legal Issues (5)
- Direct race discrimination under s.13 EqA 2010
- harassment related to race under s.26 EqA 2010
- time limits and jurisdiction (some complaints struck out for being out of time or lacking jurisdiction)
- burden of proof
- and whether the alleged treatment was less favourable or related to Polish nationality.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3312261/2023 • 17 Jun 2026
split
The claimant succeeded on her reasonable adjustment claims in respect of two PCPs and on her s.15 and s.26 claims regarding Issue 5, but failed on all other discrimination claims and the unlawful deductions/holiday pay claims, with one harassment claim dismissed as out of time.
Legal Issues (1)
- Reasonable adjustments under s.20 EqA 2010; discrimination arising from disability under s.15 EqA 2010; harassment under s.26 EqA 2010; time limits under s.123 EqA 2010; definition of PCP; substantial disadvantage; objective reasonableness of adjustments.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
2600468/2024 • 6 Jun 2026
lost
The claimant failed to prove that the comment constituted less favourable treatment or harassment, as he did not complain for 21 months, maintained a professional relationship with the respondent, and the comment was not directed at him.
Legal Issues (4)
- Whether the use of the racially offensive term amounted to less favourable treatment because of race under s.13 Equality Act 2010 and/or harassment under s.26 Equality Act 2010
- considering the delay in complaint
- lack of immediate effect
- and the apology.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3307672/2025 • 5 Jun 2026
won
Because the respondent did not respond to the claim and the Tribunal found all claims to be well founded.
Legal Issues (4)
- Unauthorised deductions from wages (s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996)
- breach of contract for notice pay
- unpaid holiday pay
- and failure to provide written particulars of employment (s.38 Employment Act 2002).
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3303833/2025 • 5 Jun 2026
won
The respondent did not contest the claim, and the tribunal determined the claims for unpaid wages, holiday pay, and notice pay were well-founded.
Legal Issues (4)
- Unauthorised deductions from wages (Employment Rights Act 1996 s.13)
- holiday pay
- breach of contract for notice pay (Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1994)
- default judgment under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
6025508/2025 • 5 Jun 2026
struck_out
The claim was struck out because the claimant did not attend the hearing and had not actively pursued the proceedings.
Legal Issues (1)
- Strike out under Employment Tribunal Rule 38(1)(d) for failure to actively pursue the claim; claimant non-attendance.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3304564/2025 • 3 Jun 2026
lost
The tribunal found that the dismissal was not unfair, because the employer's conduct (including the lack of procedure) fell within the range of reasonable responses, or that any procedural steps would have been futile.
Legal Issues (2)
- Whether the claimant had two years' continuous employment (not determined as claim failed on merits); whether the dismissal was for conduct; whether the respondent's failure to follow any procedure rendered the dismissal unfair
- or whether it was within the range of reasonable responses given procedural futility.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3200736/2024 • 3 Jun 2026
struck_out
All claims were dismissed under Rule 47 because the claimant failed to attend the hearing and did not respond to the tribunal's attempts to contact her.
Legal Issues (4)
- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 gives the tribunal discretion to dismiss a claim if a party fails to attend. The tribunal considered relevant case law (Roberts v Skelmersdale College
- Cooke v Glenrose Fish Co Ltd) and concluded that
- after making reasonable enquiries about the claimant's absence
- it was appropriate to strike out the claims in her absence.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3300110/2025 • 2 Jun 2026
split
The Claimant won his claims for unpaid wages, holiday pay, notice pay, and a redundancy payment by default judgment, but his claim for a protective award was struck out for non-compliance and failure to actively pursue it.
Legal Issues (6)
- Unauthorised deductions from wages (ERA 1996 s.13)
- Breach of contract for notice pay (Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1994)
- Redundancy payment (ERA 1996 s.135)
- Protective award (TULRCA 1992)
- Rule 22 default judgment
- Rule 38 strike out for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3307675/2025 • 2 Jun 2026
split
The claimant succeeded on claims for unpaid wages, holiday pay, and redundancy payment by default judgment, but the protective award claim was struck out for non-compliance with a tribunal order.
Legal Issues (5)
- Unauthorised deductions from wages (Employment Rights Act 1996 section 13)
- redundancy payment (section 135)
- protective award (TULRCA 1992)
- default judgment under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024
- strike out under Rule 38 for non-compliance and failure to actively pursue.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3300526/2024 • 2 Jun 2026
lost
The Tribunal found that all claims of direct discrimination, harassment, and victimisation were not well-founded and therefore failed.
Legal Issues (3)
- Claims under the Equality Act 2010: direct discrimination on grounds of race (s.13) and religion (s.13); harassment related to race and religion (s.26); and victimisation (s.27) based on three alleged protected acts (tribunal complaint
- grievances
- request to reopen grievance).
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3307668/2025 • 2 Jun 2026
struck_out
The claim was struck out because the claimant failed to comply with a Tribunal order and did not actively pursue the claim, and failed to respond to a warning letter.
Legal Issues (1)
- Striking out under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 for non-compliance with a Tribunal order and failure to pursue the claim actively.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
1400543/2026 • 1 Jun 2026
won
The respondent failed to pay the claimants their unpaid wages, notice pay, redundancy payments, and holiday pay as required by law.
Legal Issues (1)
- Unauthorised deductions from wages (Employment Rights Act 1996 s.13); breach of contract in respect of notice; statutory redundancy payment; failure to pay holiday pay.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3306475/2024 • 29 May 2026
other
The judgment is solely a costs order; the substantive outcome of the underlying claim is not stated.
Legal Issues (2)
- Costs application under Employment Tribunal rules; the tribunal allowed the application and ordered the respondent to pay £3
- 635.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
6009338/2025 • 28 May 2026
other
The application for reconsideration was refused because it was made significantly out of time and, even if time were extended, there was no reasonable prospect of varying the judgment to include a finding of employment status, as that issue was not part of the original claim or determined by the Tribunal.
Legal Issues (1)
- Reconsideration application out of time; whether the Tribunal could vary a judgment to include a finding of employment status when that issue was not part of the original claim or determined at the final hearing.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
8000291/2026 • 26 May 2026
split
The claimant succeeded on notice pay (by consent) and arrears of wages (respondent failed to prove lawful deduction), but lost the claim for a penalty under section 38(3) of the Employment Act 2002 because the respondent had provided a written statement of particulars.
Legal Issues (1)
- Breach of contract regarding notice pay; unauthorised deduction from wages; claim under section 38(3) of the Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide written statement of particulars (dismissed as respondent had complied).
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
3310751/2024 • 25 May 2026
lost
The claims were dismissed because the tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract by the respondent and no protected disclosures had been made, with the claimant's evidence being unreliable and the respondent's actions justified.
Legal Issues (1)
- Constructive unfair dismissal (whether respondent's conduct amounted to a fundamental breach of contract); protected disclosure detriments (whether claimant made qualifying disclosures and suffered detriments); credibility of claimant's evidence.
GOV.UK SourceView Decision
Data sources
Decisions are sourced from official GOV.UK Employment Tribunal publications.
Important: Summaries and statistics are automated. Always verify against the original decision documents.