Case 2406520/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Lynch v Nuclear Decommissioning Authority — 2024
- Case reference
- 2406520/2023
- Decision date
- 7 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KM Ross
- Panel members
- Mrs A Ramsden, Mr A Clarke
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Lynch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously dismissed the claimant's disability discrimination claim under section 13 Equality Act 2010. The claim alleged that the respondent dismissed him because of disability, identified in the judgment as Type 2 Diabetes, but the tribunal found it was not well-founded.
The tribunal also dismissed the claimant's claim under section 15 Equality Act 2010. That claim alleged unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, diabetes, when he was dismissed by the respondent, and the tribunal found it was not well-founded.
The written judgment records only the outcome because reasons were given orally at the hearing. No remedy award or monetary breakdown is stated.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim under section 13 Equality Act 2010 alleging dismissal because of disability, identified as Type 2 Diabetes, was not well-founded and failed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim under section 15 Equality Act 2010 alleging unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, diabetes, when dismissed was not well-founded and failed. | 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.