Case 1303186/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person (assisted by Mr L Coyne) For the v Imscan Document Services Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1303186/2022
- Decision date
- 2 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kenward
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person (assisted by Mr L Coyne) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Birmingham on 2 March 2023, Employment Judge Kenward sat alone in public. The respondent did not appear. The tribunal found that Ms E Lanza's complaints of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, and breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments were well-founded and succeeded.
The tribunal did not uphold the complaints for a redundancy payment, holiday pay, or notice pay, recording that the claimant had not yet been dismissed. Those claims therefore failed.
The respondent was ordered to pay compensation for disability discrimination of £20,265.16, itemised as £9,678.04 for financial loss, £387.12 interest, £10,000 for injury to feelings, and £800 interest on that award. The itemised figures recorded in the judgment do not reconcile arithmetically with the stated total, so the figures are reproduced as written.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination; succeeded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability; succeeded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments; succeeded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Redundancy | Not upheld because the claimant had not yet been dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Not upheld because the claimant had not yet been dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for notice pay not upheld because the claimant had not yet been dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £20,265
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £19,678
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.