Case 1401762/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Hislop v The Olympus Academy Trust — 2021
- Case reference
- 1401762/2020
- Decision date
- 18 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Cadney Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Hislop
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 4 March 2021, Employment Judge P Cadney held that Mr Hislop was disabled at the material time within section 6 Equality Act 2010. The tribunal accepted his evidence and Dr Higson's diagnosis that he had suffered PTSD and a major depressive episode since 2017, following a serious illness episode in which he believed he might die. It found that this was a continuous underlying condition with fluctuating severity, rather than separate time-limited episodes, and that it had a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day to day activities.
The respondent's application to dismiss the claims as having no reasonable prospect of success and/or to order a deposit was refused. On the unfair dismissal issue, the tribunal noted the respondent relied on admitted conduct involving harassment and class A drug use and said the merits question was whether dismissal fell within the range reasonably open to the employer. On the disability discrimination issue, including the section 15 claim, the tribunal held there was enough arguable merit to avoid strike out or a deposit order, and it made no separate order on the reasonable adjustments point relating to the disciplinary process. The substantive claims were not finally determined and directions were given for the final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary hearing only. The respondent applied to strike out the claim or obtain a deposit order, but the tribunal refused that application. No final merits determination was made. | Other | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal found the claimant was disabled within section 6 Equality Act 2010 and held the disability discrimination claim, including the section 15 point, had enough arguable merit to avoid strike out or a deposit order. No final merits determination was made. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s6 Equality Act 2010
- s15 Equality Act 2010
- no reasonable prospect of success
- little reasonable prospect of success
- range reasonably open to the respondent
- substantial and long term adverse effect on normal day to day activities
- proportionate means of achieving legitimate aims
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.