Case 1600163/2024 · Employment Tribunal

Mr J Morgan v Green Light Traffic Management Limited — 2024

Case reference: 1600163/2024
Decision date: 21 November 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge R Harfield Representation

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr J Morgan

Respondent

Green Light Traffic Management Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a preliminary hearing in Cardiff by video on 7 November 2024 before Employment Judge R Harfield. The tribunal found that Mr J Morgan was a disabled person, within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010, at the material time from January 2023 through to his dismissal on 5 October 2023, by reason of impaired mobility and pain arising from his ankle condition.

The tribunal also held that the complaints relating to dismissal on 5 October 2023, and any discriminatory conduct extending over a period culminating in that dismissal, were presented within a period the tribunal considered just and equitable. It noted that the final hearing would determine what events occurred, whether they were discriminatory, and if so whether earlier complaints were in time on that basis.

No substantive findings on liability for discrimination or other complaints were made at this stage, and no remedy was awarded.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal found the claimant was a disabled person under section 6 Equality Act 2010 at the material time, January 2023 through dismissal on 5 October 2023, by reason of impaired mobility and pain from an ankle condition. It also held that complaints relating to that dismissal or discriminatory conduct extending over a period culminating in dismissal were presented within a period the tribunal considered just and equitable. No merits findings on liability or remedy were made.	Other	—	—

Legal tests applied

2 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.