Case 1400666/2023 · Employment Tribunal
- MS R DALEY (FRIEND) FOR THE v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1400666/2023
- Decision date
- 6 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Panel members
- Ms J Kaye, Mr H Launder
Parties
1 namedClaimant
- MS R DALEY (FRIEND) FOR THE
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting in Bristol on 19 to 23 February 2024, considered Ms A Pottinger’s claims against Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd for direct disability discrimination under s13 Equality Act 2010, discrimination arising from disability under s15, and failure to make reasonable adjustments under ss20 and 21. The tribunal stated that each claim was not well founded.
All three disability discrimination claims were dismissed. The judgment does not set out any monetary award, and no remedy was recorded because the claims failed in full. The judgment also notes that any application for full written reasons had to be made in writing within 14 days of promulgation.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination contrary to s13 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability contrary to s15 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments contrary to s20/21 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.