Case 1311418/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Jennings (Lay Representative) For the v Mr R Scuplak (Consultant) — 2022
- Case reference
- 1311418/2020
- Decision date
- 11 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gaskell
- Panel members
- Ms L Wilkinson, Mr RW White
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Jennings (Lay Representative) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting in Birmingham on 9 to 11 May 2022 before Employment Judge Gaskell with members Ms L Wilkinson and Mr RW White, gave a unanimous judgment in favour of the respondent, Click Travel Limited. It held that the respondent did not act towards the claimant in contravention of section 39 of the Equality Act 2010, and dismissed the claimant's complaints of discrimination on the grounds of sex and pregnancy/maternity under section 120 of that Act.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was fairly dismissed by reason of redundancy. On that basis, the unfair dismissal claim was not well-founded and was dismissed. The claim for unpaid wages was also found not well-founded and was dismissed. No monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | 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.