Case 2403948/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Duong v Coveris Winsford Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2403948/2022
- Decision date
- 1 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mrs A Ashworth, Mr I Taylor
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Duong
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Duong brought a claim of direct race discrimination against Coveris Winsford Limited. The case was heard at Manchester by video on 17, 18 and 19 May 2023 before Employment Judge Dunlop, with Mrs A Ashworth and Mr I Taylor sitting as members.
The written judgment states that the claimant’s direct race discrimination claim was not well-founded and was dismissed. No separate remedy was awarded or recorded in the written decision.
The record notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal’s standard practice. The written record therefore contains the outcome but not the tribunal’s detailed reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal recorded that the claimant’s direct race discrimination claim was not well-founded and dismissed it. Written reasons were not provided in the written record because reasons were given orally at the hearing. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.