Case 1404237/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Thomas v AMC XL Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1404237/2021
- Decision date
- 6 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Cadney Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Bristol on 23 August 2022 before Employment Judge P Cadney, the tribunal dealt with a disability-status issue under s6 Equality Act 2010. The claim form had also included unfair constructive dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal under s103A ERA 1996, and disability discrimination, but this judgment was confined to whether the claimant was disabled by reason of dyslexia and dyspraxia.
The tribunal held that the claimant was a disabled person by reason of dyslexia, but not by reason of dyspraxia. On that basis, it said the discrimination arising from disability allegation and the first reasonable adjustments allegation, both based on dyspraxia and the requirement to wear inappropriate PPE, had no reasonable prospect of success. The judge expressed the provisional view that those dyspraxia-based claims should be struck out, but gave the claimant 14 days to object.
The second reasonable adjustments allegation, which concerned a requirement to read information immediately before a grievance hearing and was linked to dyslexia, was not finally determined at this hearing and was listed for the final hearing. The tribunal also gave case management directions about witness numbers, time estimate, and draft directions for the final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only: the tribunal held that the claimant was a disabled person within the meaning of s6 Equality Act 2010 by reason of dyslexia. The second reasonable adjustments allegation, based on a requirement to read information immediately before a grievance hearing, was left for the final hearing. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only: the tribunal held that the claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of s6 Equality Act 2010 by reason of dyspraxia. It said the s15 discrimination arising from disability claim and the first reasonable adjustments claim, both based on dyspraxia and the requirement to wear inappropriate PPE, had no reasonable prospect of success and indicated they should be struck out subject to any objection. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s6 Equality Act 2010
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.