Case 1401577/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Biddle v Southampton City Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401577/2024
- Decision date
- 7 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Self Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Biddle
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs K Biddle brought disability discrimination claims against Southampton City Council. The case was heard at Southampton on 7 May 2025 before Employment Judge Self, with Mr H Robson appearing for the claimant and Mr A Peck for the respondent.
The tribunal found that the claimant had not demonstrated that she was a disabled person pursuant to section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at any material time. On that basis, all claims of disability discrimination were found not well-founded and were dismissed.
No monetary remedy was recorded in the judgment. The judgment was approved on 7 May 2025 and sent to the parties on 20 May 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal held that Mrs K Biddle had not demonstrated that she was a disabled person within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at any material time, and accordingly all disability discrimination claims were not well-founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 6 of the 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.