Case 2201752/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Petersen First v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2201752/2018
- Decision date
- 12 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Welch
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Mr N Brockmann, Mr P Adkins
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Petersen First
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded its unanimous decision on Mr K Petersen First's claims against Govia Thameslink Railway Limited after hearings in November 2019, April 2021 and May 2021.
The judgment states that the claims of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, indirect disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment failed and were dismissed. No remedy was awarded and the judgment does not set out detailed reasons or legal tests in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination claim dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability claim dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Indirect disability discrimination claim dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments claim dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Harassment claim dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.