Case 1800051/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Jackson (Claimant’s wife) v Mr A Skelton (Director) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1800051/2019
- Decision date
- 17 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rogerson Members
- Venue
- Hull
- Panel members
- Dr P C Langman, Mr G Corbett
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Jackson (Claimant’s wife)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Jackson's claims against Modular Movements Ltd were heard at Hull on 9, 10, 11 and 12 September 2019 before Employment Judge Rogerson, with members Dr P C Langman and Mr G Corbett. The tribunal recorded that the disability discrimination complaints, identified as a failure to make a reasonable adjustment and disability-related harassment, failed and were dismissed.
The tribunal also dismissed the victimisation complaint and the constructive unfair dismissal complaint. The judgment text provided records only the outcomes and does not set out any monetary award or separate remedy.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment describes this complaint as a failure to make a reasonable adjustment; it was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment describes this complaint as disability-related harassment; it was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as constructive unfair dismissal; it was 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.