Claimant v Peninsula Business Services Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the complaint of unfair dismissal was not well-founded after a five-day full merits hearing. Reasons were given orally but not included in the written judgment.
The tribunal found the complaint of wrongful dismissal was not well-founded after a five-day full merits hearing. Reasons were given orally but not included in the written judgment.
The tribunal found the complaint of direct disability discrimination was not well-founded after a five-day full merits hearing. Reasons were given orally but not included in the written judgment.
The tribunal found the complaint of harassment related to disability discrimination was not well-founded after a five-day full merits hearing. Reasons were given orally but not included in the written judgment.
The tribunal found the complaint of discrimination arising from disability was not well-founded after a five-day full merits hearing. Reasons were given orally but not included in the written judgment.
The tribunal found the complaint of indirect disability discrimination was not well-founded after a five-day full merits hearing. Reasons were given orally but not included in the written judgment.
Facts
Mr Tunnicliffe brought claims against Peninsula Business Services Limited including unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and multiple disability discrimination claims. The case proceeded to a five-day full merits hearing in Manchester before Employment Judge Childe. The claimant appeared in person while the respondent was represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all of Mr Tunnicliffe's claims, finding none of them well-founded. This included his claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, direct disability discrimination, harassment related to disability, discrimination arising from disability, and indirect disability discrimination. Reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Practical note
A self-represented claimant bringing multiple disability discrimination claims alongside unfair dismissal was unsuccessful against a professionally-represented respondent employer after a full five-day hearing.
Case details
- Case number
- 2408752/2023
- Decision date
- 18 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 5
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No