Case 2405358/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Ramage v Home Office — 2026
- Case reference
- 2405358/2024
- Decision date
- 31 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson MEMBERS
- Panel members
- Mrs L Heath, Mr R Cunningham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Ramage
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Ramage’s claims against the Home Office were unsuccessful. The tribunal found that he was fairly dismissed, so his unfair dismissal claim failed. It also found that his complaint of wrongful dismissal/breach of contract was not well founded.
The disability discrimination complaints under section 15 and sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010 were not well founded and were unsuccessful. The tribunal also found that the complaints for unpaid holiday pay and unpaid pension contributions were not well founded.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing. The written judgment records the outcomes without setting out the underlying factual findings or reasoning. No monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was fairly dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint under section 15 Equality Act 2010 was not well founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as a single complaint of wrongful dismissal/breach of contract and finds it not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010 was not well founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Holiday pay | The complaint for unpaid holiday pay was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The complaint for unpaid pension contributions was not well founded. The judgment does not specify its legal basis. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Section 15 Equality Act 2010
- Sections 20 and 21 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.