Case 1600334/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Evans v Swansea Bay University Local Health Board — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600334/2023
- Decision date
- 25 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Harfield
- Panel members
- Ms B Roberts, Ms C Peel
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Evans
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting at Cardiff by video on 17 to 20 June 2024 before Employment Judge R Harfield, Ms B Roberts and Ms C Peel, gave a unanimous judgment dismissing Mr A Evans's complaint of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability.
The Tribunal found that the Claimant's dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. On that basis, the disability discrimination complaint was not well-founded and was dismissed.
The written record states that the reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The Tribunal unanimously dismissed the complaint of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, finding the dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.