Case 2210200/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Alexander Martin Cubbin v Age UK — 2024
- Case reference
- 2210200/2023
- Decision date
- 16 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gidney Darian
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Alexander Martin Cubbin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in London Central on 30 April 2024, the tribunal recorded that Mr Alexander Martin Cubbin's age related harassment claim against Age UK succeeded. The written record states that all of his other claims were ill founded and were dismissed.
The tribunal assessed compensation at £4,000 for injury to feelings and £316.50 interest at 8% for 362 days, making a total judgment of £4,316.50. The record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The judgment records that the Claimant's age related harassment claim succeeded. | Upheld | Age | — |
| Other | The judgment states that all of the Claimant's other claims were ill founded and dismissed, but it does not itemise them individually. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,317
- across all upheld claims
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.