Case 2501783/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2501783/2021
- Decision date
- 11 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jeram
- Venue
- Newcastle
- Panel members
- Mr R Dawson, Mr S Moules
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Newcastle Employment Tribunal before Employment Judge Jeram, sitting with Mr R Dawson and Mr S Moules, over 28, 29, 30 November and 1, 2 and 19 December 2022. The judgment was dated 11 February 2023. It disposed of five claims between the parties, including the respondent's employers contract claim and the claimant's discrimination, unfair dismissal, reasonable adjustments and breach of contract claims.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the respondent's employers contract claim was dismissed upon withdrawal by the respondent. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claimant's indirect disability discrimination claim was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim succeeded, but the claimant failed to establish any loss and the tribunal made no award. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £0
- across all upheld claims
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.