Case 3303254/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Ashley Lewis v Amicus Trust — 2024

Case reference: 3303254/2022
Decision date: 15 August 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Tynan

Indexed: 17 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Ashley Lewis

Respondent

Amicus Trust

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This PDF contains only a Costs Judgment dated 21 August 2024, issued following a hearing on 15 August 2024 at Cambridge (in private) before Employment Judge Tynan sitting alone. The Claimant was represented by Mr R Magara (Solicitor) and the Respondent by Ms L Badham (Counsel).

The Tribunal ordered the Claimant to pay the sum of £1,000 to the Respondent in respect of its costs of and associated with the hearing on 15 August 2024. The document does not set out the reasons for the costs order; it records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days.

The underlying substantive claims listed on gov.uk (including disability discrimination, race discrimination, whistleblowing, health & safety detriment and unfair dismissal) are not adjudicated within this document, so no findings on those matters can be extracted from the text provided.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	This document is a Costs Judgment only, not a substantive judgment on the underlying claims. The Tribunal ordered the Claimant to pay £1,000 to the Respondent in respect of its costs of the hearing on 15 August 2024. The underlying claims (disability discrimination, health & safety, public interest disclosure, race discrimination, unfair dismissal per the gov.uk listing) are not adjudicated in this PDF; written reasons were not provided as the reasons were given orally. Outcome of substantive claims cannot be determined from this text.	Other	—	£1,000

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £1,000; across all upheld claims

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.