Case 3312709/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Clarke, Counsel v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 3312709/2023
- Decision date
- 21 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Watford via CVP
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr N Clarke, Counsel
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in Leigh Turner v Movianto UK Limited, heard at Watford via CVP on 20 December 2024 before Employment Judge de Silva KC. The tribunal determined a single recorded issue: whether the claimant had a disability for the purposes of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the material times.
The tribunal held that he did. The record states that the claimant’s conditions were depression and Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder, and that these amounted to a disability within the statutory definition. No separate substantive liability decision or remedy award is recorded in this short judgment.
The decision was given orally at the hearing and the written record was sent to the parties on 21 January 2025. The judgment notes that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days, and no further reasons appear in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only: the tribunal found that, at the material times, the claimant had a disability within section 6 Equality Act 2010, namely depression and Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.6 Equality Act 2010
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.