Case 1802257/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Dunn (counsel) For the v Respondent — 2020

Case reference: 1802257/2019
Decision date: 22 January 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Davies
Venue: Leeds
Panel members: Mr D Fields, Mrs V Griggs

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

1 named

Claimant

Mr Dunn (counsel) For the

Respondent

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal, sitting at Leeds before Employment Judge Davies with lay members Mr D Fields and Mrs V Griggs, recorded that ACAS had notified it that a COT3 settlement had been concluded between the parties. The order gave the parties liberty to apply by 3 March 2020.

The judgment stated that if no application was made by that date, the claims would be dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. The written record contains no merits findings and no monetary award.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	The judgment records that an ACAS COT3 settlement had been concluded and that, if no application was made by 3 March 2020, the claims would be dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. The claim type is taken from the case listing; the written judgment itself does not restate the pleaded issues.	Settled	Disability	—
Unfair dismissal	The judgment records that an ACAS COT3 settlement had been concluded and that, if no application was made by 3 March 2020, the claims would be dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. The written judgment does not set out any merits findings or a claim-specific remedy.	Settled	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.