Case 1302836/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Horan, counsel v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1302836/2022
- Decision date
- 7 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton
- Panel members
- Mr N Howard, Mr J Wagstaffe
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr J Horan, counsel
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Birmingham, including by video, on 4-7 March 2024 before Employment Judge Broughton with Mr N Howard and Mr J Wagstaffe sitting as lay members. The claimants were Miss C Folan and Mr K Moranis, represented by Mr J Horan, and the respondent was Event Support Team Limited, represented by Mr A Bryant.
The written judgment is brief. It states that settlement terms had been reached and confirmed by ACAS, and that the proceedings are dismissed. The judgment does not set out findings on the underlying breach of contract, disability discrimination, unlawful deduction from wages, or working time issues.
No monetary award is recorded in the judgment, and no remedy calculation is given. The written record is limited to the procedural dismissal following settlement.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The written judgment records that settlement terms had been reached and confirmed by ACAS, and that the proceedings were dismissed. It does not record separate merits findings for this claim. | Settled | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The written judgment records that settlement terms had been reached and confirmed by ACAS, and that the proceedings were dismissed. It does not record separate merits findings for this claim. | Settled | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written judgment records that settlement terms had been reached and confirmed by ACAS, and that the proceedings were dismissed. It does not record separate merits findings for this claim. | Settled | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The written judgment records that settlement terms had been reached and confirmed by ACAS, and that the proceedings were dismissed. It does not record separate merits findings for this claim. | Settled | — | — |
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.