Case 1304273/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 1304273/2018
- Decision date
- 13 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lloyd Members
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mrs I R Fox, Mr D Faulconbridge
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat in Birmingham on 9, 11, 12 and 13 December 2019 before Employment Judge Lloyd, with Mrs I R Fox and Mr D Faulconbridge as members. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Ms A Ahmad, Counsel.
The judgment records that the tribunal unanimously dismissed the claimant's claims in their entirety upon his withdrawal. The short judgment does not set out any substantive findings on the merits of the pleaded complaints, and there is no indication of any liability determination on the facts.
The respondent made no application for costs, and the tribunal therefore made no costs order against the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment does not identify the individual allegations, but the case listing was for disability discrimination and the tribunal recorded that the claims were dismissed upon the claimant's withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not separately set out the unfair dismissal particulars; it records that the claimant's claims were dismissed in their entirety upon his withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.