Case 1601573/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Lear v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2022
- Case reference
- 1601573/2021
- Decision date
- 6 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Harfield
- Panel members
- Mrs L Bishop, Ms R Lewis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Lear
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Cardiff over 29 and 30 November and 1 and 2 December 2022, before Employment Judge R Harfield, Mrs L Bishop and Ms R Lewis. The claimant was represented by Mr Cowley of the Citizens Advice Bureau, and the respondent by Mr Rhys-James, counsel.
The judgment records that the complaints of disability related harassment, direct disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments were not well founded and were dismissed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written judgment does not set out further factual findings or reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The judgment states the complaint of disability related harassment was not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states the complaint of direct disability discrimination was not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states the complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments was not well founded and 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.