Case 2600878/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Matthews v SPS Technologies Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2600878/2020
- Decision date
- 15 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed Members
- Panel members
- Ms L. Lowe, Mr R. Loynes
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Matthews
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe unanimous judgment of Employment Judge Ahmed, sitting with Ms L. Lowe and Mr R. Loynes, was issued on 15 April 2021 after hearings at Leicester on 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12 April 2021. The tribunal held that Mr T Matthews was unfairly dismissed. It also dismissed the complaint of direct age discrimination and the complaint of breach of contract.
The written record does not contain the tribunal's oral reasons or any detailed factual findings. It records only the final orders, so the basis on which the unfair dismissal claim succeeded and the age discrimination and breach of contract claims failed is not set out in this document.
Remedy was not determined in this judgment. The tribunal adjourned the issue of remedy to 3 and 4 August 2021. The record also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons will not be provided unless separately requested within the stated time limit.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The written record contains only the dispositive order. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and no written reasons are provided in this record. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.