Case 1401153/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr James Lancaster v HAL Maritime Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1401153/2018
- Decision date
- 15 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson Representation
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr James Lancaster
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Southampton on 12 July 2019, Employment Judge Dawson recorded that the Employment Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to determine the claimant's claims. The judgment therefore dismissed the claims, without setting out substantive findings on liability or remedy.
The written decision also records that the respondent's application for costs was dismissed. No monetary award was made to either party, and the short written record states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing. The judgment itself does not set out the underlying factual dispute or any detailed legal analysis in writing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The written judgment does not identify the individual claim types beyond referring to the claimant's 'claims'. This classification follows the gov.uk case listing for this matter. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The written judgment does not identify the individual claim types beyond referring to the claimant's 'claims'. This classification follows the gov.uk case listing for this matter. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.