Case 1301189/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Wood v Iforce Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 1301189/2017
- Decision date
- 19 January 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Panel members
- Mr G Harker, Mr K Lannaman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Wood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Leeds, a unanimous tribunal of Employment Judge D N Jones, Mr G Harker and Mr K Lannaman found that Ms E Wood was disabled by osteoarthritis and that the respondent had reasonable grounds to know that. It held that the final written warning issued on 15 December 2016 was a detriment and that the treatment was because of something, namely her refusal to comply with a management instruction, which arose in consequence of her disability. The tribunal also held that the claim was presented in time.
The tribunal further found that the respondent breached its duty to make reasonable adjustments by not adjusting the height of printers at the workstations, which required the claimant to bend to collect invoices and placed her at a substantial disadvantage. The complaints of victimisation and the remaining reasonable-adjustments complaints were dismissed, and the complaint of direct discrimination was dismissed upon withdrawal. The tribunal awarded £8,000 compensation plus £693 interest for injury to feelings and recommended that the respondent withdraw the written warning issued on 6 February 2017 and expunge references to that warning and the final written warning of 15 December 2016.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found that issuing the claimant with a final written warning on 15 December 2016 was unfavourable treatment because of something, namely her refusal to comply with a management instruction, which arose in consequence of her osteoarthritis. It found that the respondent had reasonable grounds to know she was disabled and that the claim was presented in time. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found a breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments in failing to adjust the height of the printers at the workstations where the claimant had to work, which required her to bend to collect invoices and placed her at a substantial disadvantage. It found that the respondent knew, or had reasonable grounds to know, that she was disabled and of the disadvantage; other adjustments complaints were dismissed. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The complaint of victimisation was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of direct discrimination was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,693
- 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.