Case 1303263/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Robert Harding v JD Wetherspoon — 2019
- Case reference
- 1303263/2018
- Decision date
- 29 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Coghlin QC
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Miss S Outwin, Mrs M Howard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Robert Harding
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claims at Birmingham over five hearing days in October 2019, with a chambers day on 6 November 2019. The panel consisted of Employment Judge T Coghlin QC, Miss S Outwin and Mrs M Howard.
The unanimous judgment was that Mr Harding's claims of disability discrimination, unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal were not well-founded. All three claims were dismissed.
The judgment does not set out separate factual findings, legal reasoning, or any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states the disability discrimination claim was not well-founded and dismissed, without further reasons in the extracted text. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the unfair dismissal claim was not well-founded and dismissed, without further reasons in the extracted text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states the wrongful dismissal claim was not well-founded and dismissed, without further reasons in the extracted text. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.