Case 1400752/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Thornton v DR Groundworks Ltd v DR Groundworks Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1400752/2024
- Decision date
- 30 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Gray-Jones Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Thornton v DR Groundworks Ltd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge D Gray-Jones on 13 December 2024. The tribunal decided that Mr D Thornton was not a disabled person within the meaning of s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the time of the alleged discrimination. That finding was the basis for the dismissal of the disability-related complaints then before the tribunal.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found the Claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the time of the alleged discrimination, so the complaint of discrimination arising from disability was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed because the tribunal found the Claimant was not disabled within the meaning of s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the relevant time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The complaint of harassment related to disability was dismissed after the tribunal found the Claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the time of the alleged discrimination. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.6 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.