Case 4104901/2024 · Employment Tribunal
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4104901/2024 (V) Held on January 2025 Employment Judge N M Hosie Mr S Calvert v Represented by Ms A Robertson,15 Mother Highland Carpets & Flooring Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 4104901/2024
- Decision date
- 8 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4104901/2024 (V) Held on January 2025 Employment Judge N M Hosie Mr S Calvert
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn this judgment, given orally at the hearing on 6 January 2025 and issued on 8 January 2025, Employment Judge N M Hosie determined preliminary issues in Mr S Calvert's claim against Highland Carpets & Flooring Ltd. The tribunal held that the claimant was a disabled person at the relevant time for the purposes of s.6 Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal also held that it had jurisdiction to consider his claim. No substantive determination of liability on the underlying discrimination complaint is set out in the judgment, and no remedy or monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found the claimant was a disabled person at the relevant time under s.6 Equality Act 2010 and that it had jurisdiction to consider his claim; no substantive liability decision is recorded in this judgment. | Other | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.