Case 1601680/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Smith v Chenery Enterprises Ltd (t/a Premier Windows and Conservatories) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1601680/2018
- Decision date
- 17 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins
- Venue
- Llandudno
- Panel members
- Ms C Peel, Mr B Roberts
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Smith
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Llandudno on 12 November 2019, Employment Judge S Jenkins sitting with Ms C Peel and Mr B Roberts recorded a single finding: Mr R Smith was not, at the relevant times, disabled for the purposes of section 6(1) of the Equality Act 2010. The written record identifies Chenery Enterprises Ltd (t/a Premier Windows and Conservatories) as respondent and states that the judgment was given orally at the hearing.
The written judgment does not set out further findings, any separate liability conclusions, or any monetary award. It records that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal note attached to the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found that the claimant was not, at the relevant times, disabled for the purposes of section 6(1) of the Equality Act 2010. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 6(1) Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.