Case 2502080/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Macpherson v Mr C Haak and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2502080/2023
- Decision date
- 3 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge SE Langridge
- Venue
- Newcastle upon Tyne Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs S Don, Mr KA Smith
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr D Macpherson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Newcastle upon Tyne Hearing Centre on 1-3 July 2024 before Employment Judge SE Langridge with members Mrs S Don and Mr KA Smith. The claimant, Mr D Macpherson, appeared in person and the respondents were represented by counsel.
The only claim recorded in the judgment was a claim under the Equality Act 2010 for failure to make reasonable adjustments. The tribunal held that the claim was not well-founded and dismissed it.
The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. The extracted text therefore contains the disposal of the claim, but not the tribunal's detailed reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant's Equality Act 2010 claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments was not well-founded and was dismissed. The extracted text does not include the tribunal's detailed oral reasons. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.