Case 2304269/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Skinner v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2304269/2019
- Decision date
- 4 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
- Venue
- London South via CVP
- Panel members
- Ms H Bharadia, Ms C Edwards
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Skinner
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting with Employment Judge Wright and members Ms H Bharadia and Ms C Edwards, heard the case at London South via CVP between 25 April 2022 and 4 May 2022.
The tribunal unanimously held that the claimant's claims of unlawful discrimination contrary to the Equality Act 2010 failed and were dismissed. It also held that the claimant's claim that the dismissal was unfair under the Employment Rights Act 1996 failed and was dismissed.
The judgment does not set out further reasons, factual findings, or any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's claims of unlawful discrimination contrary to the Equality Act 2010 failed and were dismissed. The gov.uk category identifies the discrimination claim as disability discrimination; the extracted judgment text itself does not specify the protected characteristic. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant's claim that the dismissal was unfair per the Employment Rights Act 1996 failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.