Case 4107147/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Member A Atkinson Tribunal Member K Pirie v Mr Michael Healy — 2024
- Case reference
- 4107147/2023
- Decision date
- 3 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Kemp Tribunal
- Venue
- Aberdeen
- Panel members
- A Atkinson, K Pirie
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Member A Atkinson Tribunal Member K Pirie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims of direct age discrimination and harassment related to age. The Tribunal identified the issues as including whether matters before 9 July 2023 were within jurisdiction, whether the first respondent had subjected the claimant to less favourable treatment because of age, whether any treatment was objectively justified, and whether the first respondent had subjected the claimant to unwanted conduct related to age.
The Tribunal found that the first respondent did not breach sections 13 or 26 of the Equality Act 2010. It accepted evidence that the relevant decisions and discussions were connected to workforce planning and performance concerns rather than the claimant's age, and it did not accept the claimant's submission that there was a hostile work environment.
The claims against all respondents were dismissed. Because no claim succeeded, the Tribunal stated that remedy did not arise.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. The judgment also held that matters before 9 July 2023 were outwith the Tribunal's jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to age under section 26 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. The judgment also held that matters before 9 July 2023 were outwith the Tribunal's jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 26 Equality Act 2010
- section 110 Equality Act 2010
- Igen
- Selsdon
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.