Case 1600591/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Major v Orbis Education and Care Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1600591/2020
- Decision date
- 9 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Davies
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Major
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a withdrawal order made under rule 52. It records that the claimant withdrew two complaints: direct disability discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and discrimination arising from disability under section 15, both said to concern the provision of a reference.
Those two complaints were dismissed following the withdrawal. The judgment states that the claimant's remaining claims would proceed to hearing, but it does not determine those claims in this decision.
No remedy was awarded in this judgment, and no findings beyond the withdrawal-based dismissal of the two specified disability discrimination complaints are recorded in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed following the claimant's withdrawal of the s13 Equality Act 2010 direct disability discrimination complaint concerning provision of a reference. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed following the claimant's withdrawal of the s15 Equality Act 2010 discrimination arising from disability complaint concerning provision of a reference. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 52
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.