Case 1303791/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Allsopp, Solicitor For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1303791/2019
- Decision date
- 10 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lloyd Members
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mr J Reeves, Ms H Astill
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr T Allsopp, Solicitor For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously held that Mr N Donovan was not unfairly dismissed, so the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. It also rejected the disability discrimination claim. The judgment records that the claimant was dismissed in circumstances arising in consequence of his disability, but the respondent proved that the dismissal was justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the claimant’s proceedings in their entirety. No monetary remedy was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in circumstances arising in consequence of his disability, but the respondent proved the dismissal was justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.