Case 3307561/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Graham Stimpson v DHL Services Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3307561/2023
- Decision date
- 14 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge F Allen Representation
- Venue
- Cambridge Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Graham Stimpson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge F Allen on 2 May 2024. The tribunal held that Mr Graham Stimpson was not a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 at any time relevant to the proceedings.
On that basis, the claimant’s Equality Act 2010 claims were dismissed. The written record does not set out further substantive reasoning because the judgment notes that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant’s wrongful dismissal/notice pay claim was not determined at this hearing and was listed for a separate one-day hearing at Cambridge Hearing Centre on 2 September 2024 before a judge sitting alone.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | At the preliminary hearing, the tribunal found that the claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 at any time relevant to the proceedings, and dismissed the Equality Act 2010 claims. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.