Case 6008777/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Chatburn v The Big Life Group — 2026
- Case reference
- 6008777/2025
- Decision date
- 1 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Chatburn
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Holmes at Manchester on 20 January 2026, heard by CVP. The tribunal held that the claimant's wrongful dismissal claim, described in the judgment as wrongful dismissal (breach of contract), and his disability discrimination claim had no reasonable prospects of success.
Both claims were struck out pursuant to rule 38(1)(a) of the 2024 Rules of Procedure. The written record states that the hearing listed for 9 December 2026 was cancelled. No remedy was awarded because the claims were struck out at the preliminary stage.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The claimant's wrongful dismissal claim, described in the judgment as wrongful dismissal (breach of contract), was held to have no reasonable prospects of success and was struck out under rule 38(1)(a) of the 2024 Rules of Procedure. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claimant's disability discrimination claim was held to have no reasonable prospects of success and was struck out under rule 38(1)(a) of the 2024 Rules of Procedure. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 38(1)(a) of the 2024 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.