Case 1400038/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Swain v Stonehaven Healthcare Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1400038/2021
- Decision date
- 2 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Cadney Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Swain
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in Bristol before Employment Judge P Cadney on 1 February 2022. The tribunal first decided the disability issue under s6 Equality Act 2010 and held that Ms L Swain was not, at the relevant times, a disabled person within the meaning of that section.
Because the claimant was not found to be disabled, her claim of discrimination arising from disability under s15 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. The tribunal also dismissed her application to amend the claim to add harassment under s26 Equality Act 2010. No monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found that the claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of s6 Equality Act 2010, so the s15 discrimination arising from disability claim failed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The claimant's application to amend to add a s26 Equality Act 2010 harassment claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s6 Equality Act 2010
- s15 Equality Act 2010
- s26 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.