Case 6012599/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Jackson in person For the v Respondent — 2026
- Case reference
- 6012599/2024
- Decision date
- 16 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Livesey
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr D Jackson in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge J Bax at Bristol on 16 January 2026 to determine the Respondent's applications to strike out the Claimant's claims of race and age discrimination and breach of contract, or alternatively for deposit orders. The Claimant, who was employed by easyJet Airline Company Limited between 29 January and 21 June 2024 during his probationary period, brought allegations of direct age and race discrimination relying on a hypothetical younger and non-Liverpudlian comparator, together with a breach of contract claim concerning the absence of a right of appeal.
The Tribunal struck out the race discrimination claims on the basis that the Claimant had no reasonable prospects of success. The applications to strike out the age discrimination and breach of contract allegations were dismissed. In relation to two age discrimination allegations (delay in providing a driving permit and failure to provide a functioning airside pass), the Judge found there were little reasonable prospects of success, noting that these allegations were based on the Claimant's assumption rather than evidence of any age-related comments by the relevant decision-makers, and made deposit orders of £150 on each. A further deposit order of £150 was made on the breach of contract allegation.
The Judge declined to make deposit orders in relation to the work allocation and "leaving in the office" allegations, finding that comments the Claimant relied upon could potentially shift the burden of proof depending on the evidence and findings of fact at a full hearing. The Claimant was ordered to pay the deposits within 14 days as a condition of being permitted to continue to advance the specified allegations.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Claims of race discrimination struck out on the basis that the Claimant had no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | Application to strike out age discrimination allegations dismissed. Deposit orders of £150 made in relation to two age discrimination allegations (driver's permit and airside pass) on the basis of little reasonable prospect of success; deposit orders refused for the other two age discrimination allegations. Substantive claims not yet adjudicated at this preliminary hearing. | Other | Age | — |
| Breach of contract | Application to strike out dismissed. Deposit order of £150 made on the basis that the breach of contract allegation had little reasonable prospect of success. Substantive claim not yet adjudicated at this preliminary hearing. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £0
- across all upheld claims
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.