Case 1405900/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Charlie George v Marks and Spencer plc — 2020
- Case reference
- 1405900/2019
- Decision date
- 16 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Representation
- Venue
- Exeter
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Charlie George
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined a preliminary issue concerning whether Marks & Spencer plc fell within the Equality Act 2010 provisions relied on in relation to work experience. It found that the respondent was an employment service provider under section 55 Equality Act 2010 because it was concerned in the provision of work experience to the claimant, as defined by sections 56(2)(a) and 56(6)(b).
On that basis, the tribunal held that the respondent was under an obligation not to discriminate against the claimant by not offering to provide work experience to him, or as to the terms on which it offered to do so. The judgment records oral reasons only and does not decide liability on the discrimination claim or any remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment only determines a preliminary issue under sections 55 and 56 Equality Act 2010. It does not determine whether discrimination occurred or award any remedy. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 55 Equality Act 2010
- sections 56(2)(a) and 56(6)(b) Equality Act 2010
- section 55(1)(c) Equality Act 2010
- section 55(1)(b) 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.
- 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.