Case 2401191/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Grundy v Dodd Engineering Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2401191/2020
- Decision date
- 20 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne Members
- Venue
- Liverpool
- Panel members
- Ms B Hillon, Mr G Pennie
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Grundy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously found that Dodd Engineering Ltd discriminated against Mr J Grundy by breaching the duty to make adjustments. The breach identified in the judgment was the failure to consult him before dismissing him for redundancy. The tribunal also stated that the respondent did not otherwise breach the duty to make adjustments.
The tribunal rejected the remaining disability discrimination claims. It found that the respondent did not discriminate against Mr Grundy because of something arising from his disability, and it also found that the respondent did not discriminate against him because of his disability. The extract records that reasons were given orally at the hearing, so no written reasons or monetary breakdown appear in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
3 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 | The tribunal found a breach of the duty to make adjustments, specifically in failing to consult the claimant before dismissing him for redundancy. It also said the respondent did not otherwise breach the duty to make adjustments. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal rejected the claim that the respondent discriminated against the claimant because of something arising from his disability. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal rejected the claim that the respondent discriminated against the claimant because of his disability. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.