Ms V. Britton v Ministry of Justice — 2024

The claimant brought complaints arising from her resignation, including constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The respondent accepted that the claimant was disabled for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's witnesses where it conflicted with the claimant's evidence and found that several alleged factual bases for the reasonable adjustment complaints were not established.

The reasonable adjustment complaints were dismissed. The tribunal found that the respondent did not require the claimant to take annual leave or flexi time for the relevant medical appointments, that it did not have the relevant knowledge for the mobile phone adjustments at the material time, that the parking allegation was not supported by the evidence, and that the proposed restriction on trigger words or command-style instructions was not a reasonable adjustment in the workplace context.

The harassment complaints were also dismissed. The tribunal found that one alleged accusation by Mr Plaisted was not made out, that Mrs Evison did not have relevant knowledge when using the words relied on in H2, and that although later words were unwanted conduct related to disability, it was not reasonable for them to have the alleged harassing effect. The indirect discrimination claim was dismissed because there was no evidence of group disadvantage and because the claimant was not placed at the disadvantages claimed.

For constructive dismissal, the tribunal found that the respondent had not failed to make reasonable adjustments, had not harassed the claimant as alleged, and that the meeting on 23 November 2022 did not amount to a breach of contract. It concluded there was no repudiatory breach and that the claimant resigned for a reason unconnected with any alleged repudiatory breach by the respondent.