Case 3303444/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Farrell v Sullivan Bus & Coach Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3303444/2022
- Decision date
- 21 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Farrell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal recorded that the claim was issued in the South East Employment Tribunals on 20 April 2020 and that the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the claims succeed under Rule 21, but does not break down the individual claims or the eventual remedy. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Sexual orientation discrimination | The judgment states that the claims succeed under Rule 21, but does not break down the individual claims or the eventual remedy. | Upheld | Sexual orientation | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claims succeed under Rule 21, but does not break down the individual claims or the eventual remedy. | Upheld | — | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment states that the claims succeed under Rule 21, but does not break down the individual claims or the eventual remedy. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.