Case 3220590/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Garrett v Howden Joinery Group plc — 2023
- Case reference
- 3220590/2020
- Decision date
- 30 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moor Members
- Panel members
- Mr L Purewal, Mr S Woodhouse
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Garrett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Garrett brought complaints against Howden Joinery Limited. The Tribunal sat at East London Hearing Centre, with Employment Judge Moor and members Mr L Purewal and Mr S Woodhouse. The written judgment records that the complaint of unfair dismissal was not well-founded and did not succeed.
The judgment also records that the Respondent was not under a duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010. The written record does not set out monetary remedy because the claims recorded in the judgment did not succeed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, with written reasons only to be provided if requested within the stated time limit.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the complaint of unfair dismissal was not well-founded and did not succeed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the Respondent was not under a duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.