Employer file
Since 2017, Of allowing the amendments, including additional costs involved in defending the claims, including preparation costs. Although the same facts are relied upon, I accepted that the legal issues involved are separate from those in the disability discrimination claim. There would then be some additional hearing 4110004/2021 Page time and preparation time required, although it appeared that there would be no need for any additional witnesses. 60. I took into account the has appeared as a respondent in 1 employment tribunal case, with £0 in total awards recorded against the employer.
| # | Claim type | Cases | Relative share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Disability discrimination | 1 |
| Case ref. | Decided | Jurisdiction | Claimant | Claim types | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4110004/2021 | 14 June 2022 | Scotland | Mrs Natalie Ann Wright | Disability discrimination | — |
Data extracted from published employment tribunal judgments on gov.uk. Case reference, decision date, judge, venue and claim categories come from structured metadata. Claimant and respondent names are extracted from the judgment PDF text, and a second LLM-assisted pass adds per-claim outcomes, key findings, and any compensation awarded. Many UK tribunal decisions are liability-only — the remedy is set at a later hearing — so a case can correctly show an outcome with no award figure. See how the data is built.