Case 3307097/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr James Kelly v Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils — 2020
- Case reference
- 3307097/2020
- Decision date
- 21 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ord Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr James Kelly
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response having been received to the claim, the tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment. It found that Mr James Kelly had been unfairly dismissed, that he had been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the grounds of disability, and that he had suffered unlawful deductions from wages, each as alleged in the claim form submitted on 21 July 2020.
The judgment records that the claim succeeded and that the remedy to which the claimant was entitled would be determined at a Remedy Hearing. No monetary award is set out in this judgment, and no split between heads of loss is provided in the text supplied.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Found in default judgment under Rule 21 after no response was received to the claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found the claimant had been the victim of unlawful discrimination on grounds of disability as pleaded in the claim form. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant had suffered unlawful deductions from wages as set out in the claim form. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.