Case 3303456/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 3303456/2019
- Decision date
- 3 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 3 January 2020 before Employment Judge R Lewis, the tribunal dealt with strike-out and deposit-order applications in a case brought by Mr A Habowski against Luton and Dunstable Hospital NHS Trust. The claimant was present in person and the respondent was represented by counsel, Mr D Brown.
The tribunal struck out the claimant's disability discrimination claim insofar as it related to his application for the substantive post of Sterile Services Technician, holding that that claim had no reasonable prospect of success. No further findings on the merits of the claim are recorded in this judgment.
The respondent's other applications to strike out and/or for deposit orders were refused. No monetary remedy or award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The claim was disability discrimination in relation to the claimant's application for the substantive post of Sterile Services Technician. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- no reasonable prospect of success
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
- Open official judgment 4 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.