Case 2206547/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Abouelnaga v Royal College of General Practitioners Heard via Cloud Video Platform (London Central) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2206547/2020
- Decision date
- 12 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davidson
- Panel members
- Mr I Allwright, Mr F Benson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Abouelnaga
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting remotely via the cloud video platform on 12 May 2021, heard evidence from the claimant and from Stuart Copus. The panel recorded that there were no technical difficulties and that it was satisfied that none of the witnesses was being coached or assisted by any unseen third party while giving evidence.
In its judgment, Employment Judge Davidson, sitting with Mr I Allwright and Mr F Benson, held that the claimant's complaints of sex discrimination and disability discrimination failed and were dismissed unanimously. The written record does not set out further factual findings or legal reasoning beyond that outcome.
No monetary remedy was awarded. The record also states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.