Case 1308527/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Christian Mallon v West Midlands Growth Company Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1308527/2023
- Decision date
- 3 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kight Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Christian Mallon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought disability discrimination claims after applying for a Business Development Manager role with the respondent. The claims identified for the preliminary hearing were failure to make reasonable adjustments, discrimination arising from disability, and victimisation; the claimant had confirmed he was not pursuing direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, or harassment.
At the preliminary hearing, the tribunal refused the claimant's application to amend the claim to add direct disability discrimination. It also refused the respondent's application to strike out the existing claims, and refused the respondent's alternative application for deposit orders of £1000 for each claim.
For victimisation, the tribunal considered the disclosed email trail and was not persuaded that the claimant had no or little reasonable prospect of showing that he had done a protected act. It also found that issues about detriment and the respondent's reasons for not responding to or investigating the complaint could not be determined summarily without oral evidence.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments based on a lack of an auxiliary aid. The judgment refused strike-out and deposit applications at a preliminary stage and did not determine the merits. | Other | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability. The judgment refused strike-out and deposit applications at a preliminary stage and did not determine the merits. | Other | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal refused to strike out the victimisation claim and refused a deposit order; the merits were not finally determined. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Selkent Bus Co Limited v Moore
- Vaughan v Modality Partnership
- section 27(2)(d) Equality Act 2010
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.