Case 1805366/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Gloag (counsel) For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 1805366/2020
- Decision date
- 21 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
- Panel members
- Mr R Webb, Mr R Priestley
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr A Gloag (counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting with Employment Judge JM Wade and lay members Mr R Webb and Mr R Priestley, heard the case by CVP on 19 to 21 October 2021. The only substantive outcome recorded in the extracted judgment text is that the claimant's Equality Act complaints were dismissed.
The extracted text does not set out the tribunal's reasons, findings of fact, or any separate remedy assessment. The associated listing identifies the complaints as race discrimination and religion or belief discrimination, but the judgment text itself records only dismissal of the Equality Act complaints in general terms.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The judgment states only that the claimant's Equality Act complaints were dismissed; the gov.uk listing identifies race discrimination as one of the listed complaints. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment states only that the claimant's Equality Act complaints were dismissed; the gov.uk listing identifies religion or belief discrimination as one of the listed complaints. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.