Case 3303368/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Broomes v Ocado Central Services Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3303368/2021
- Decision date
- 10 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Richard Wood
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Broomes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting as Employment Judge Richard Wood alone at a telephone hearing, dealt with two applications by the claimant to amend the claim form.
The claimant's application to amend the claim form to include a claim for discrimination arising out of disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. The claimant's application to amend the claim form to include a claim for unfair dismissal was also dismissed. The judgment records no remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment dismissed the claimant's application to amend the claim form to include a claim for discrimination arising out of disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010; it does not adjudicate the substantive discrimination claim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment dismissed the claimant's application to amend the claim form to include a claim for unfair dismissal; it does not adjudicate a substantive unfair dismissal claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 15 of 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.