Case 3205893/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Htwe v Runwood Homes Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3205893/2021
- Decision date
- 3 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Htwe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 21 October 2022 before Acting Regional Employment Judge Burgher, the respondent applied to strike out the claimant's disability discrimination claim, alternatively for a deposit order. The issue was whether the claimant could establish that he was disabled by reason of a hearing impairment. The tribunal recorded that the ET1 alleged he could not hear a buzzer 6 feet away and described severe deafness, while at earlier hearings he said he was partially deaf and later said he had below average hearing rather than severe deafness.
The tribunal relied on the absence of supporting medical evidence. The claimant's audiology report dated 16 February 2022 showed normal hearing in both ears, and GP and hospital records from 2017 to 2022 contained no evidence of hearing difficulties. The claimant's representative argued that he could give evidence about lip reading, difficulty hearing workplace conversations, concern about not hearing the work buzzer, adjusting his voice to background noise, and equipment he had bought to help at work, but the tribunal held that the documentary evidence did not support his contention that he had a hearing impairment at all.
The tribunal struck out the disability discrimination claim under Rule 37 on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success and said that it was therefore dismissed. The judgment states that the ruling did not affect the claimant's remaining claims, which were listed to be heard in July 2023.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | At a preliminary hearing, the tribunal struck out the disability discrimination claim, which it also described as a claim for discrimination arising from disability, because the claimant had no reasonable prospect of proving he had a hearing impairment/disability at the relevant time. The judgment states that the claim was therefore dismissed. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 37(1)(a) Employment Tribunals Rules 2013
- Rule 39 deposit order
- balance of probabilities
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.