Case 1311276/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Mabrouk v St.Thomas Aquinas Catholic Multi Academy Trust — 2026
- Case reference
- 1311276/2024
- Decision date
- 9 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Macdonald
- Venue
- Midlands West
- Panel members
- Ms M Stewart MBE, Mrs D Hill
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Mabrouk
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that Mrs S Mabrouk brought complaints against St Thomas Aquinas Catholic Multi-Academy Trust including Equality Act claims and an Agency Workers Regulations claim. Employment Judge E Macdonald sat with Ms M Stewart MBE and Mrs D Hill, and oral reasons were given at the hearing.
The complaints of indirect discrimination on the ground of religion or belief and victimisation were dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. The judgment records no remedy in respect of those withdrawn complaints.
The remaining complaints were found not well-founded and dismissed. Those were direct disability discrimination, direct religion or belief discrimination, discrimination arising from disability contrary to s 15 Equality Act 2010, indirect disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, harassment related to disability, and failure to inform contrary to Regulation 13 Agency Workers Regulations 2010.
No monetary award or remedy was recorded in the written judgment. The judgment states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested at the hearing or within 14 days of the written record being sent.
Claims and outcomes
9 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | Complaint of indirect discrimination on the ground of religion or belief was dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
| Victimisation | Complaint of victimisation was dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of direct disability discrimination was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Complaint of direct religion or belief discrimination was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of discrimination arising from disability contrary to s 15 Equality Act 2010 was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of indirect discrimination on the ground of disability was found not well-founded and dismissed. |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s 15 Equality Act 2010
- Regulation 13 Agency Workers Regulations 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.