Case 4103448/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J McCaig Mrs J Lindsay Mrs S E Hastings v Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs — 2024
- Case reference
- 4103448/2023
- Decision date
- 29 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Cowen
- Venue
- Glasgow
- Panel members
- Mr J McCaig, Mrs J Lindsay
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J McCaig Mrs J Lindsay Mrs S E Hastings
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal gave an oral judgment following a hearing in Glasgow on 26, 27, 28 and 29 February 2024. The written judgment records that the claimant's claim for disability discrimination under sections 15 and 20 of the Equality Act 2010 was upheld.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £36,758.25. The written judgment does not provide a breakdown of that sum or set out the tribunal's detailed factual reasoning beyond referring to the reasons given orally.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant's claim for disability discrimination under s.15 Equality Act 2010 was upheld, but does not split the monetary award by statutory provision. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant's claim for disability discrimination under s.20 Equality Act 2010 was upheld, but does not split the monetary award by statutory provision. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £36,758
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.15 Equality Act 2010
- s.20 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.