Case 2203124/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Tomasic v Charles Taylor Administration Services Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2203124/2022
- Decision date
- 17 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Panel members
- Mr D Schofield, Mr D Clay
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Tomasic
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at London Central on 14, 15 and 17 March 2023 before Employment Judge A M Snelson with members Mr D Schofield and Mr D Clay. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by a solicitor.\n\nThe tribunal recorded that the claimant’s complaint of direct disability discrimination under Equality Act 2010 ss.13 and 39(2)(c) and (d) was dismissed on withdrawal. It also found that the claimant’s complaint of unfair dismissal under Employment Rights Act 1996 s.103A was not well-founded.\n\nAccordingly, the proceedings as a whole were dismissed. The judgment does not record any monetary award or separate remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the complaint of direct disability discrimination under Equality Act 2010 ss.13 and 39(2)(c) and (d) was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of unfair dismissal under Employment Rights Act 1996 s.103A was not well-founded. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.