Case 3304958/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Gray v P&F Safepac Co. Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3304958/2023
- Decision date
- 12 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Warren Members
- Venue
- Norwich
- Panel members
- Miss H Edwards, Ms S Elizabeth
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Gray
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Norwich heard the case on 19 to 23 February 2024 before Employment Judge M Warren with lay members Miss H Edwards and Ms S Elizabeth. The written judgment records that Mr J Gray's claim that he was discriminated against by reason of disability succeeded. No written reasons are included in the public record because the judgment was given orally at the hearing, and the note states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
By consent, the compensation payable by P&F Safepac Co. Limited to Mr Gray was fixed at £30,000. The record does not split that figure into separate heads of loss or otherwise provide a written remedy breakdown.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The written record states that the Claimant's discrimination by reason of disability claim succeeded. The judgment records that compensation of £30,000 was agreed by consent. No written reasons are provided because the judgment was given orally at the hearing. | Upheld | Disability | £30,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £30,000
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £30,000
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.