Case 3313516/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Joanne May, Solicitor For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 3313516/2019
- Decision date
- 3 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Members
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Ms J Costley, Ms L Davies
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms Joanne May, Solicitor For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claim at Cambridge on 25, 26 and 29 October 2021 before Employment Judge Tynan, sitting with lay members Ms J Costley and Ms L Davies. The claimant was represented by Ms Joanne May, Solicitor, and the respondent by Mr T Sheppard, Counsel.
The judgment states that the claimant's various complaints that he was discriminated against on the grounds of disability were not well founded. Those complaints were dismissed. The written record does not set out separate findings on individual sub-claims, nor does it record any monetary award or remedy.
The judgment notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing, so no written reasons were provided unless requested within 14 days. On the face of the written judgment, the only recorded outcome is dismissal of the disability discrimination complaints.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The written judgment records that the claimant's various complaints of disability discrimination were not well founded and were dismissed; it does not identify the individual sub-claims in this extract. | 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.