Case 3306497/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Hughes v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2023
- Case reference
- 3306497/2021
- Decision date
- 3 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Mrs F Tankard, Ms D Ballard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Hughes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Reading on 21-25 and 29 August 2023 before Employment Judge Anstis, sitting with Mrs F Tankard and Ms D Ballard. The claimant was represented by counsel and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The written judgment records only the outcome: the claimant's claims are dismissed. It states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within the applicable time limit. No remedy was awarded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written judgment states that the claimant's claims are dismissed but does not give written reasons or separately identify each claim. This claim is identified from the listing category/context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The written judgment states that the claimant's claims are dismissed but does not give written reasons or separately identify each claim. This claim is identified from the listing category/context. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.