Case 1601218/2023 · Employment Tribunal
IN PERSON (SUPPORTED BY MRS REYNEKE) FOR THE v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1601218/2023
- Decision date
- 30 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Panel members
- Ms D Hebb, Mr M Lewis
Parties
1 namedClaimant
IN PERSON (SUPPORTED BY MRS REYNEKE) FOR THE
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting with Employment Judge S Povey and lay members Ms D Hebb and Mr M Lewis, gave a unanimous judgment after hearings on 19, 20 and 21 August 2024. It dismissed the claimant's complaint of discrimination arising from disability, his complaint of breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments, and his complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages.
The written record records only the outcome of each complaint. It states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's standard procedure. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of discrimination arising from disability; dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments; dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages; dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.