Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that the claimant�s claim of unlawful sex discrimination is dismissed.
1.������ The claimant initially claimed that he had been unlawfully discriminated against on the ground of his sex in that the respondent had failed to appoint him to the position of the Coffee Shop Assistant (part-time) at the end of August 2014.� The respondent denied his allegations in their entirety.�
2.������ (1)����� The legal issue before the tribunal was identified at a Case Management Discussion on 29 January 2015 as follows:-
������������������� Whether the respondent discriminated against the claimant on grounds of his gender and failing to appoint him to the position of Coffee Shop Assistant (part-time) at the end of August 2014.� The respondent confirmed that two female staff were appointed as a result of the recruitment process complained of by the claimant.
(3)����� The issue before the tribunal was whether the respondent discriminated against the claimant on the ground of his sex during the recruitment process.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.