Case 1805974/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Widdison v Katharine Manns (t/a The Door Rack Café (Dinnington)) HELD in Sheffield — 2023
- Case reference
- 1805974/2022
- Decision date
- 21 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain Members
- Panel members
- Mr W Roberts, Mrs S Robinson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Widdison
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy consent, the tribunal recorded that Mr A Widdison was a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 by reason of autism at the material time, which was on or around 10 August 2022. The claim brought under sections 15 and 39(1)(a) of the Equality Act 2010 succeeded.
The tribunal awarded £1,200 compensation for injury to feelings consequent upon the discrimination found. It also awarded £76 interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996, calculated at 8% from 10 August 2022. The total payable was £1,276, due on or before 8 June 2023. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and are not included in written form in this document.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | By consent, the claimant was a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 by reason of autism at the material time on or around 10 August 2022. The tribunal upheld the claim under sections 15 and 39(1)(a) Equality Act 2010 and awarded £1,200 for injury to feelings. Interest of £76 was awarded separately under the Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996. | Upheld | Disability | £1,200 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,276
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 6 Equality Act 2010
- sections 15 and 39(1)(a) Equality Act 2010
- Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996
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.