Case 2216163/2023 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 2216163/2023
- Decision date
- 20 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Klimov Tribunal
- Panel members
- Z Darmas, N Sandler
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found in favour of the claimant on two disability discrimination complaints arising from his dismissal on 29 August 2023. It held that the dismissal amounted to direct disability discrimination under s.13 Equality Act 2010 because the respondents treated him less favourably because of his disability than they would have treated a person without that disability in materially different circumstances.
The tribunal also upheld the complaint of discrimination arising from disability under s.15 Equality Act 2010. It found that the claimant was dismissed because of something arising in consequence of his disability, identified in the judgment as insufficient engagement with the business and a perception that he was insufficiently engaged with the business or not working hard enough.
All other complaints were dismissed. The tribunal did not determine remedy in this judgment; it directed that all remedy issues, if not agreed between the parties, would be listed for a later remedy hearing, and required the parties to write in by 31 December 2024 with dates to avoid and proposed directions.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination under s.13 Equality Act 2010; the tribunal found the claimant was dismissed on 29 August 2023 and that this was less favourable treatment because of disability. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability under s.15 Equality Act 2010; the tribunal found the claimant was dismissed on 29 August 2023 because of something arising in consequence of his disability, namely insufficient engagement with the business or a perception that he was insufficiently engaged or not working hard enough. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Other | All other complaints in the claim were dismissed. The judgment does not identify each of those complaints in the short text extracted here. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.15 Equality Act 2010
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.