2402195/2023Partial success

Complete Review Ltd

v Mr M Fogg

24 September 2024·Employment Tribunal·England & Wales·Employment Judge K M Ross

Respondent

Complete Review Ltd

All cases →

Decision date

24 September 2024

Tribunal

Employment Tribunal

Jurisdiction

England & Wales

Judge

Employment Judge K M Ross

Case Summary

The claimant succeeded in his claims of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal, but failed in some other claims.

Why this outcome?

One claim dismissed on the merits

The claimant succeeded in establishing that he was dismissed and subjected to unfavorable treatment (threats, physical contact, forced resignation) because of something arising in consequence of his disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010, but failed on other claims (demotion, parking space, wage deductions) where the tribunal found the unfavorable treatment was not because of his disability.

Related guide

Unfair dismissal cases won in the UK

Compare this judgment with other successful unfair dismissal cases and controlled win reasons.

Open examples

Key Issues

  • disability discrimination
  • unfair dismissal

Decision Text

Full PDF

Case No. 2402195/2023 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr M Fogg Respondent: Complete Review Ltd Heard at: Manchester On: 22 and 23 September 2024 Before: Employment Judge K M Ross Ms V Worthington Mr G Pennie REPRESENTATION: Claimant: in person Respondent: Ms Morriss, HR and Finance Director JUDGMENT The unanimous judgment of the Tribunal is that: 1. The claimant's claim that he was dismissed because of something arising in consequence of disability pursuant to section 15 Equality Act 2010 is well- founded and succeeds. 2. The claimant’s claim that he was treated unfavourably by the respondent who subjected him to threats of violence, used force against the claimant by poking him in the chest, ordered the claimant to leave the premises immediately and told the claimant to resign because of something arising in consequence of his disability is well-founded and succeeds. 3. The claimant's claim that the respondent treated the claimant unfavourably by demoting the claimant in his job, replacing the claimant in his role and decreasing the claimant's pay pursuant to section 15 Equality Act 2010 is not well-founded and does not succeed because although the Tribunal accepts the claimant was demoted in his job, was replaced in his role and his pay was due to be decreased, this was not because of something arising in consequence of the claimant's disability. 4. The claimant's claim that the respondent ordered the claimant to move his car and no longer use a parking space because of something in consequence of disability pursuant to section 15 Equality Act is not well-founded and fails. Case No. 2402195/2023 2 Notice Pay 5. The claimant’s claim for unlawful deductions from wages in relation to a four week ( rather than 1 week) notice period is not well-founded and fails. Reme

Something doesn't look right?

Report a wrong claim type, outcome, summary, or award.