Case 1405098/2023 · Employment Tribunal
- IN PERSON FOR THE v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1405098/2023
- Decision date
- 28 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
1 namedClaimant
- IN PERSON FOR THE
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Bristol on 3 to 6 June 2024 before Employment Judge Mr P Cadney sitting alone. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr T Holloway of counsel.
The judgment records that, by consent, the claimant's claims of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, harassment and victimisation were dismissed on withdrawal. No findings on the merits of those claims are set out in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal by consent; direct disability discrimination claim. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal by consent; discrimination arising from disability claim. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal by consent; failure to make reasonable adjustments claim. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Dismissed on withdrawal by consent; harassment claim under the Equality Act 2010. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Dismissed on withdrawal by consent; victimisation claim under the Equality Act 2010. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.