Case 1302995/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. M A Rashid v Guide Dogs for the Blind Association — 2024
- Case reference
- 1302995/2023
- Decision date
- 19 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Camp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. M A Rashid
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy an order dated 28 June 2024, Employment Judge Camp gave the claimant an opportunity to explain why the complaint of direct disability discrimination should not be struck out on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success. The written reasons record that the claimant failed to make representations in writing, or failed to make any sufficient representations, in response to that order.
On that basis, the Tribunal struck out the complaint of direct disability discrimination. The judgment does not record any substantive determination of that complaint on the merits, and no monetary remedy was awarded for it.
The reasons also state that the remaining complaints were to be considered at the final hearing listed to commence on 28 April 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination complaint struck out after the claimant failed to make written representations, or made insufficient representations, in response to the Tribunal's order dated 28 June 2024; the Tribunal had indicated the claim had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.