Case 2403203/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Wylie v Baker Hughes — 2022
- Case reference
- 2403203/2020
- Decision date
- 17 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sharkett REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Wylie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case on 11 and 12 January 2022 before Employment Judge Sharkett. It decided, as a preliminary issue, that during the relevant period of the claimant’s employment with Baker Hughes Limited, from 13 February 2019 to 26 November 2019, he was not disabled for the purposes of s.6 Equality Act 2010.
Because the claimant was found not to have the protected characteristic of disability, the tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear his disability discrimination claims. No remedy was awarded. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only: the tribunal found the claimant was not disabled for the purposes of s.6 Equality Act 2010 during the period 13 February 2019 to 26 November 2019, so he could not rely on disability as a protected characteristic. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.6 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.