Case 2400003/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Carter v Parkland Estates Limited and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 2400003/2019
- Decision date
- 24 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne MEMBERS
- Panel members
- Mr M Gelling, Ms D Kelly
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr M Carter
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously held that it had jurisdiction to consider the complaints of failure to make adjustments and indirect discrimination only for the period June to September 2018. Claims based on earlier periods were out of time, and it was not just and equitable to extend time for those earlier complaints. For the June to September 2018 period, Parkland Estates Limited failed in its duty to make adjustments and indirectly discriminated against Mr Carter. The tribunal also held that it had no jurisdiction to consider complaints of harassment or discrimination arising from disability before September 2018. It found that Mr Robinson did not harass the claimant in September 2018. It further found that, even if harassment had occurred, it would not have contravened the Equality Act 2010 because it was not in the course of Mr Robinson's employment with Parkland Estates Limited and was not in relation to the claimant's employment. On the discrimination arising from disability complaint, the tribunal found that Mr Robinson discriminated against the claimant in September 2018 because of something arising in consequence of his disability, but held that this did not contravene the Equality Act 2010 because it was not in the course of Mr Robinson's employment with Parkland Estates Limited. By way of remedy, Parkland Estates Limited was ordered to pay £4,500 damages plus £600 interest for the discrimination findings, and a further £600 under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, making a total award of £5,700.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make adjustments. The tribunal held it had jurisdiction only for June to September 2018, found the claim out of time before June 2018, and held Parkland Estates Limited failed in its duty to make adjustments during June to September 2018. This formed part of the joint damages award of £4,500 plus £600 interest. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Indirect discrimination. The tribunal held it had jurisdiction only for June to September 2018, found the claim out of time before June 2018, and held Parkland Estates Limited indirectly discriminated against the claimant during June to September 2018. This formed part of the joint damages award of £4,500 plus £600 interest. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal had no jurisdiction for any period before September 2018. It found Mr Robinson did not harass the claimant in September 2018 and added that, if he had, the conduct would not have contravened the Equality Act 2010 because it was not in the course of Mr Robinson's employment with Parkland Estates Limited and not in relation to the claimant's employment. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability. The tribunal had no jurisdiction before September 2018, found that Mr Robinson discriminated against the claimant in September 2018 because of something arising in consequence of his disability, but held that the conduct did not contravene the Equality Act 2010 because it was not in the course of Mr Robinson's employment with Parkland Estates Limited. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,700
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £4,500
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable
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.