Case 2301651/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Ranwell v Hewlett-Packard Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301651/2022
- Decision date
- 4 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Bromige Representation
- Venue
- London South ET
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Ranwell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 1 June 2023 before Employment Judge J Bromige at London South Employment Tribunal, the tribunal dealt only with the Claimant's indirect age discrimination claim against Hewlett-Packard Limited. The written judgment records that the claim was struck out because it had no reasonable prospects of success under Rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment does not set out substantive findings on the merits of the discrimination allegation, and it gives no award because the claim was not allowed to proceed. It also records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note attached to the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment states that the Claimant's claim for indirect age discrimination was struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.