Case 1406501/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Philip Harris v David Hart Aerospace Pipes Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1406501/2020
- Decision date
- 17 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Philip Harris
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis written judgment determined a preliminary issue only. The tribunal found that Mr Philip Harris was disabled at all material times. No substantive liability findings were made on the underlying claims in this record.
The judgment states that the hearing on the merits was to take place on 20 June 2022, with the existing case management orders continuing to apply. The only procedural change recorded was an extension of the date by which each side had to exchange witness statements, to 11 March 2022.
Because the written record is confined to the preliminary issue, it does not record any remedy, compensation, or final determination of the discrimination or unfair dismissal claims. The tribunal's written reasons were not provided, as reasons had been given orally at the hearing and no request for written reasons is recorded in the judgment text supplied.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled at all material times. No substantive claim outcome or remedy was determined in this written record, and the case was listed for a further hearing on 20 June 2022. | Other | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.