Case 2200391/2021 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 2200391/2021
- Decision date
- 25 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Klimov Tribunal
- Panel members
- T Breslin, S Godecharle
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at London Central heard Miss E Taylor's claims against Clarion Housing Group Limited on 22 to 25 March 2022 before Employment Judge P Klimov sitting with tribunal members T Breslin and S Godecharle. In the written judgment dated 25 March 2022, it dismissed the claim for direct disability discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010, the claim for discrimination arising from disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010, and the unfair dismissal claim.
The supplied extract contains only the formal dispositive record and does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasoning or any remedy assessment. It notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless a request was made, so no monetary award or separate remedy figure is recorded in the text provided.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination claim under s 13 Equality Act 2010 dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability claim under s 15 Equality Act 2010 dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | 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.