Case 1601156/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Lewis v Transport for Wales Rail Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1601156/2021
- Decision date
- 23 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sharp
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Mrs J Kiely, Mrs L Bishop
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Lewis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat in Cardiff before Employment Judge C Sharp with Mrs J Kiely and Mrs L Bishop as the lay members. After hearing evidence on 14-16 November 2022 and 21-22 November 2022, the tribunal gave a unanimous judgment.
It held that Mr S Lewis’s claim for ordinary unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. The tribunal also dismissed his claim for direct disability discrimination and his claim for discrimination arising from disability, both as not well-founded.
The written record states that reasons for the decision were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons are not provided in this document unless requested under the tribunal rules. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal recorded two disability discrimination claims: direct disability discrimination and discrimination arising from disability. Both were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal recorded two disability discrimination claims: direct disability discrimination and discrimination arising from disability. Both were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.