Case 2205343/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Hannigan v British Telecommunications plc — 2019
- Case reference
- 2205343/2018
- Decision date
- 24 January 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woffenden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Hannigan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Mr R Hannigan brought proceedings against British Telecommunications Plc. It does not set out factual findings, issues, or reasons on the merits of any complaint.
The Employment Tribunal dismissed the proceedings following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. No remedy or monetary award was made or addressed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim type follows the gov.uk listing category; the judgment text itself does not set out the individual complaints and states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claim type follows the gov.uk listing category; the judgment text itself does not set out the individual complaints and states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Claim type follows the gov.uk listing category; the judgment text itself does not set out the individual complaints and states that the proceedings were dismissed following withdrawal of the claim by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.