Case 6002049/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Martin Tiffin v BCP Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002049/2023
- Decision date
- 29 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Martin Tiffin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Southampton on 20 August 2025 before Employment Judge Gray. The claimant, Mr Martin Tiffin, appeared in person with court-appointed transcribers, and the respondent, BCP Council, was represented by counsel.
The written judgment records that the complaints of direct sex discrimination and direct disability discrimination were dismissed on withdrawal. No substantive merits determination is recorded for those two complaints, and the judgment does not set out any compensatory or other remedy in relation to them.
The judgment also states that the claimant's other complaints continued. It therefore resolves only the withdrawn discrimination complaints and leaves the remaining complaints for later determination. Written reasons were not provided because the judgment notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and no written reasons were requested within the stated time limit.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The judgment records that this complaint was dismissed on withdrawal. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that this complaint was dismissed on withdrawal. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.