Case 2400256/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Daley v Vodafone Automotive UK Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2400256/2019
- Decision date
- 14 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tom Ryan
- Panel members
- Mr D Wilson, Mr A J Gill
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Daley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting with Employment Judge Tom Ryan and lay members Mr D Wilson and Mr A J Gill, heard the case on 23 and 24 October 2019. It recorded two complaints: disability discrimination and unfair dismissal. The claimant was represented by his daughter, Mrs C Barton, and the respondent by Mrs M Peckham, solicitor.
The complaint of disability discrimination was found not well-founded and was dismissed. The complaint of unfair dismissal was found well-founded, and the tribunal declared that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed.
Although the unfair dismissal claim succeeded, the tribunal made no award of compensation in respect of that claim. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal declared the claimant was unfairly dismissed but made no award of compensation. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £0
- across all upheld claims
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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.