Case 2400499/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Vaughan v Vantec Europe Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2400499/2024
- Decision date
- 20 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mr A Gill, Ms C. Nield
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Vaughan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Vaughan brought claims against Vantec Europe Limited that were heard at Manchester on 4, 5, 6 and 7 February 2025 before Employment Judge Leach, Mr A Gill and Ms C. Nield. The claims included Equality Act 2010 complaints of direct discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments, Employment Rights Act 1996 complaints of unauthorised deduction from wages and unfair dismissal, and a breach of contract claim for notice pay.
The tribunal dismissed all of the claims. It recorded that the Equality Act complaints did not succeed, and that the complaints of unauthorised deduction from wages and unfair dismissal under the Employment Rights Act 1996 also did not succeed. The breach of contract claim for notice pay was likewise dismissed.
The judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and does not record any award or remedy. No monetary sum is identified in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct discrimination complaint under the Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments complaint under the Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages under the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Unfair dismissal complaint under the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract complaint concerning notice pay. | 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.