Case 1402709/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Veolia ES (UK) Ltd and others — 2023
- Case reference
- 1402709/2021
- Decision date
- 1 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Le Grys
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary issue hearing before Employment Judge Le Grys on 9 February 2023. The Tribunal dealt with liability questions rather than the substantive merits of any underlying claims. It held that the First Respondent was not liable under section 109(2) Equality Act 2010 for any contraventions said to have occurred after the transfer of employment from the First to the Second Respondent on 1 May 2021.
The Tribunal also found that the Claimant's claim in respect of the Fourth Respondent was not well founded and dismissed it. The Fourth Respondent was removed as a party to the proceedings. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing, and no written reasons were provided unless requested within the stated time limit.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Preliminary issue: the Tribunal held the First Respondent was not liable under section 109(2) Equality Act 2010 for any contraventions post-dating the transfer of employment to the Second Respondent on 1 May 2021. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The Claimant's claim against the Fourth Respondent was held not well founded and was dismissed; the Fourth Respondent was removed as a party to the proceedings. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 109(2) 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.