Case 2300828/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Gary Westwell v South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation — 2023
- Case reference
- 2300828/2022
- Decision date
- 12 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rice-Birchall
- Panel members
- Mr Cann, Ms Bharadia
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Gary Westwell
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr Gary Westwell, brought a direct disability discrimination claim against South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation. The case was heard at London South by CVP on 11 and 12 October 2023 before Employment Judge Rice-Birchall, sitting with Mr Cann and Ms Bharadia.
The tribunal's judgment records that the claim of direct disability discrimination failed and was dismissed. No monetary award is recorded in the written judgment extract.
The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The extracted text does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasoning, so only the outcome can be recorded from this record.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's direct disability discrimination claim failed and was dismissed. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing, but no written reasons are included in the extracted text. | 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.