Case 2300599/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Clark v JLT Benefit Solutions Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2300599/2018
- Decision date
- 11 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Corrigan
- Venue
- Ashford
- Panel members
- Ms R Downer, Mr N Phillips
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Clark
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe matter was heard at Ashford on 9 to 11 September 2019 before Employment Judge Corrigan, sitting with Ms R Downer and Mr N Phillips. The written judgment records that Mr M Clark was not unfairly dismissed by JLT Benefit Solutions Limited and that the tribunal did not find a contravention of the Equality Act 2010 in respect of discrimination arising from disability.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the claimant's complaints. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested within 14 days, so the extracted judgment does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasoning or any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal recorded that it had not found a contravention of the Equality Act 2010 (discrimination arising from disability). | 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.
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.