Case 1601459/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Richard Tyler v BeDigital UK Ltd and 2 others — 2025
- Case reference
- 1601459/2024
- Decision date
- 9 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Macdonald Appearances
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr Richard Tyler
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a record of a preliminary hearing heard in public by video at Cardiff Employment Tribunal on 20 December 2024 before Employment Judge E Macdonald. The tribunal decided a preliminary disability issue and found that the claimant, Mr Richard Tyler, was disabled at the material time, including from 21 November 2023 onwards, by reason of Autistic Spectrum Disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
The record does not contain any determination of liability on the substantive claims or any remedy award. It also states that written reasons will not be provided unless requested in accordance with the usual rule, so this record captures only the disability-status finding made orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled at the material time, including from 21 November 2023 onwards, by reason of Autistic Spectrum Disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. The record does not contain any final liability decision on the substantive claims. | Upheld | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.