Case 1301332/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Devon Orgill v Jaguar Land Rover Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1301332/2022
- Decision date
- 14 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Boyle Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham ET
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Devon Orgill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Birmingham Employment Tribunal before Employment Judge Boyle on 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 July 2023. The claimant was represented by Mrs D Orgill as lay representative, and the respondent by Mr G Price, counsel.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal claim, finding it was not well-founded. It also dismissed the claims of direct age discrimination, direct race discrimination, and indirect age discrimination, each of which was found not well-founded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the claim for unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination under s 13 Equality Act 2010 was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination under s 13 Equality Act 2010 was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | Indirect age discrimination under s 19 Equality Act 2010 was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s 13 Equality Act 2010
- s19 Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.