Case 1303251/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Williams v Herefordshire & Worcestershire Health & Care NHS Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 1303251/2022
- Decision date
- 14 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kenward
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mr I Morrison, Mr J Reeves
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Williams
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Birmingham before Employment Judge Kenward with Mr I Morrison and Mr J Reeves, heard Mrs S Williams's claims against Herefordshire and Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust on 5 to 9 February 2024. In its unanimous judgment, it found one indirect disability discrimination complaint well-founded under section 19 of the Equality Act 2010. That successful complaint concerned the application of a requirement to cover for the lack of support staff, which the tribunal accepted placed the claimant at a particular disadvantage through exacerbation of mental health, greater risk of health-related problems, and reduced ability to meet working requirements.
The tribunal dismissed the remaining indirect disability discrimination complaints as not well-founded. It also dismissed the claims for breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010. The judgment does not set out remedy, because the case was listed for a further hearing to deal with remedy.
The written record notes that the reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested. On the face of the judgment, the only substantive liability finding recorded is the single successful indirect discrimination complaint; all other complaints recorded in the order were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 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 | Indirect disability discrimination under Equality Act 2010 section 19. The tribunal found well-founded the complaint based on the application of the requirement to cover for the lack of support staff, and the pleaded disadvantages of exacerbation of mental health, greater risk of health-related problems, and being less likely to be able to meet working requirements. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Other complaints of indirect disability discrimination under Equality Act 2010 section 19 were found not well-founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaints of breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments under Equality Act 2010 sections 20 and 21 were not well-founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Equality Act 2010 section 19
- Equality Act 2010 sections 20 and 21
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.