Case 1306502/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Mallon v Energy Systems Catapult Ltd«resp_others» — 2024
- Case reference
- 1306502/2020
- Decision date
- 20 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Edmonds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Mallon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal refused the claimant's application for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 20 June 2024. It found there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked.
The reasons addressed the claimant's numbered grounds, including disability, reliance on previous tribunal decisions, AI scoring, substantial disadvantage, financial hardship, a recent job application rejection, and the possible types of discrimination. The Tribunal stated that the claimant's disability had been taken into account, that he had been able to make oral submissions and answer financial questions, and that the new points would not have changed the decision to make a deposit order rather than strike out the claim entirely.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | This short judgment refuses the claimant's application for reconsideration of a judgment sent on 20 June 2024. It concerns a deposit order and possible strike out in a disability discrimination claim, not a final merits or remedy decision. | Dismissed | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
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.