Case 3302486/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Zanders v Bracknell Forest Borough Council — 2024
- Case reference
- 3302486/2023
- Decision date
- 7 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maxwell
- Panel members
- Mr Wharton, Mr Sutton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Zanders
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard Mr R Zanders' claims against Bracknell Forest Borough Council at Reading by CVP on 13, 14, 15, 16 and 19 February 2024 before Employment Judge Maxwell, sitting with Mr Wharton and Mr Sutton. The judgment records three claims for determination: discrimination arising from disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and a redundancy payment claim.
Each claim was found not well founded and dismissed. The disability-related claims were dismissed on the tribunal's findings, and the redundancy payment claim was also dismissed. The extracted text does not set out any separate monetary award, remedy calculation, or further reasoning beyond those dispositive findings.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim pleaded as discrimination arising from disability; found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim pleaded as failure to make reasonable adjustments; found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Redundancy | Claim for a redundancy payment found not well founded and dismissed. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.