Case 2500285/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Norman First v Thompson & Howe Ltd t/a Innovations Second Respondent: Victoria Aitken Third Respondent: Trisha Leonard Fourth Respondent: Nicola Nelson Fifth Respondent: Cath Tweedy — 2022
- Case reference
- 2500285/2022
- Decision date
- 31 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Appearances
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Sweeney recorded that the complaints of age discrimination and harassment, and religion or belief discrimination and harassment, were dismissed upon withdrawal against all five respondents. The judgment identifies those complaints as brought under sections 13, 19 and 26 of the Equality Act 2010.
The judgment also states that it does not affect the other complaints of disability discrimination and/or disability related harassment. No determination is recorded in this judgment for those remaining complaints, and no remedy is awarded here.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The judgment records that the complaint of age discrimination and harassment, contrary to sections 13, 19 and 26 Equality Act 2010, was dismissed upon withdrawal against all five respondents. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment records that the complaint of religion or belief discrimination and harassment, contrary to sections 13, 19 and 26 Equality Act 2010, was dismissed upon withdrawal against all five respondents. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
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.