Case 2402304/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Walker v Asda Stores Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2402304/2019
- Decision date
- 18 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne Members
- Venue
- Liverpool
- Panel members
- Miss A Ross-Sercombe, Mr W K Partington
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Walker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case by remote video platform at Liverpool before Employment Judge Horne and two members. The claimant was represented by his brother and the respondent by counsel.
The judgment records that the respondent did not breach the duty to make reasonable adjustments. It also records that the respondent did not discriminate against the claimant because of disability or discriminate against him arising from disability.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing. The written judgment does not set out the tribunal's detailed factual findings or legal reasoning, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim that the respondent discriminated against the claimant arising from disability was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim that the respondent breached the duty to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim that the respondent discriminated against the claimant because of disability was dismissed. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.