Case 2411244/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Mr M Popham v Halcyon Tankers Limited and 2 others — 2024

Case reference: 2411244/2023
Decision date: 12 July 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Johnson Date

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

4 named

Claimant

Mr M Popham

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At the oral hearing on 2 July 2024, the tribunal found that Mr Popham was not disabled within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010. On that basis, it held that it no longer had jurisdiction to hear the disability discrimination complaint and dismissed that complaint.

Because the disability discrimination complaint was the sole complaint brought against the second respondent, the tribunal also dismissed the claim against that party. The first respondent’s application for strike out under Rule 37 and/or a deposit order under Rule 39 in relation to the remaining unlawful deduction from wages complaint was unsuccessful.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	The tribunal found the claimant was not disabled within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010, so it no longer had jurisdiction to hear the disability discrimination complaint. The complaint against the second respondent was dismissed because disability discrimination was the only complaint brought against that party.	Dismissed	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

4 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.