Case 3313938/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Vincent McCusker v London Borough of Hillingdon — 2021
- Case reference
- 3313938/2021
- Decision date
- 18 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Vincent McCusker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out both of the claimant's disability discrimination claims at Watford on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success. The written record identifies the claims as discrimination arising in consequence of disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
No detailed substantive findings are set out in the written record because the reasons were given orally at the hearing. The record therefore only captures the procedural outcome: both claims were struck out.
The tribunal also ordered the claimant to pay the respondent's costs in the sum of £350.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim of discrimination arising in consequence of disability struck out as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim of failure to make reasonable adjustments struck out as having no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £350
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.