Case 2300103/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Cook v Screen Solutions Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2300103/2018
- Decision date
- 11 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Dr Fernando, Ms D Mitchell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place at London South Employment Tribunal on 11 March 2020 before Employment Judge Martin, sitting with Dr Fernando and Ms D Mitchell. Mr D Cook appeared in person and Screen Solutions Ltd was represented by Mr Crawford, Counsel.
The tribunal unanimously held that the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed. The judgment records that full reasons were given orally at the end of the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested within 14 days of the judgment being sent to the parties. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted judgment text states only that the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed; this claim type is inferred from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The extracted judgment text states only that the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed; this claim type is inferred from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The extracted judgment text states only that the claimant's claims failed and were dismissed; this claim type is inferred from the case listing context. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
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.