Case 2402166/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M F Sardar v Shipping Force Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2402166/2019
- Decision date
- 9 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M F Sardar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe written judgment record for 25 November 2019 states that Mr M F Sardar had a disability within the meaning of section 6(1) of the Equality Act 2010 by reason of Erb's Palsy. The hearing was before Employment Judge Leach in Manchester, with representation recorded for both sides.
The supplied text does not set out the substantive outcome of the underlying employment claims. It records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless a request was made within 14 days of the sending of the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The written record states that the claimant had a disability within s.6(1) Equality Act 2010 by reason of Erb's Palsy. It does not state the substantive outcome of the underlying claims in the supplied text; it records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.6(1) Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.