Case 3322126/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Kozera v Glazerite Windows Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3322126/2019
- Decision date
- 8 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Kozera
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Butler, sitting alone at Nottingham on 4 December 2020, dealt with preliminary issues in Mr L Kozera's claims against Glazerite Windows Limited. The tribunal held that Mr Kozera was not disabled for the purposes of s. 6 Equality Act 2010, so the disability discrimination claim was dismissed.
The tribunal also found that the direct race discrimination claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out under rule 37 of the Tribunals Rules of Procedure. In addition, the unspecified Working Time Regulations claim was dismissed after withdrawal by the claimant.
The judgment recorded that the unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims were not determined at that hearing and would proceed to a further hearing. No remedy was assessed in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal held that the claimant was not disabled for the purposes of s. 6 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal found the direct race discrimination claim had no reasonable prospect of success and struck it out under rule 37. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Working time regulations | The unspecified Working Time Regulations claim was dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s. 6 Equality Act 2010
- rule 37 of the Tribunals Rules of Procedure
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.