Case 1309398/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms T Dell-Noon v Birmingham City Council — 2024
- Case reference
- 1309398/2022
- Decision date
- 20 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Faulkner
- Venue
- Midlands West
- Panel members
- Mrs E Shenton, Mrs J Whitehill
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms T Dell-Noon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs T Dell-Noon brought disability-related claims against Birmingham City Council arising out of events at the Registry Office and subsequent grievance handling. The tribunal recorded that her disabilities included endometriosis and leg nerve damage. It held that the respondent did not contravene section 39 of the Equality Act 2010 by directly discriminating against her because of her disabilities in moving her work location to the ground floor on 30 May 2018, telling her she would remain there until medically redeployed, or in the later grievance correspondence and steps listed in the judgment.
The tribunal also rejected the claim that the respondent discriminated against her because of something arising in consequence of her disabilities when it moved her to the ground floor between 30 May and 12 July 2018. It found no failure to make reasonable adjustments in relation to the preparation of personal emergency evacuation plans or the physical features of the ground floor. The claims framed as victimisation, based on the handling of her grievance and the 15 June 2022 letter saying the grievance had been resolved, were also dismissed.
The harassment claim under section 40 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed as well. The tribunal held that informing the claimant in an open plan office on 30 May 2018 that she was being moved to the ground floor did not amount to harassment related to disability. No monetary award was made because all claims failed.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination claim under section 39 Equality Act 2010 dismissed. The tribunal held the respondent did not discriminate against Ms T Dell-Noon because of her disabilities, or any of them, in moving her from the first-floor location to a ground-floor room in the Registry Office on 30 May 2018, telling her she would work there until medically redeployed, dealing with her grievance between 11 June 2018 and 29 November 2022, denying access to a grievance hearing and appeal between 15 June 2022 and 29 November 2022, writing on 15 June 2022 that the grievance had been resolved, writing on 21 October 2022 about a Stage 4 appeal, or refusing on 31 October 2022 to change the grievance chair. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim that the respondent discriminated against the claimant because of something arising in consequence of her disabilities of endometriosis and leg nerve damage dismissed. The alleged treatment was the move to the ground floor of the Registry Office from 30 May to 12 July 2018. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments claim dismissed. The tribunal found no contravention in relation to the provision, criterion or practice of preparing personal emergency evacuation plans, and no contravention in relation to the physical features of the ground floor of the Registry Office. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation claim dismissed. The tribunal held the respondent did not victimise the claimant by failing to address her grievance in a timely manner or by informing her on 15 June 2022 that her grievance had been resolved. |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 39 Equality Act 2010
- because of something arising in consequence of her disabilities
- failing to make reasonable adjustments
- section 40 Equality Act 2010
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.