Claimant v Southern Electric Power Distribution plc — 2019

The claimant worked for the respondent from 26 August 2019 as an administrator and the respondent accepted that she was disabled by reason of persistent delusional disorder. The tribunal found that she was dismissed on probation by letter dated 14 February 2020 and that her appeal was later concluded on 22 April 2020, but it held that the dismissal and appeal outcome were not shown to be because of disability. It also found that the respondent did not fail to investigate her earlier complaints about bullying, noise, or a colleague, and that the later investigation into the allegations raised on appeal was reasonable.

The section 15 claim failed because the tribunal did not find that the matters relied on by the claimant arose in consequence of her disability. It was not satisfied that when she was bullied or under stress she was absent because of her persistent delusional disorder, and it found no evidence that she spoke to Gillian Forrester, Austin Cobb, or Ian Boucher in an open or naïve way because of disability. The tribunal also found that, if knowledge had mattered, the respondent did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that she had a disability during employment, and that the claimant had not disclosed it in the probationary, dismissal, or appeal process.

The indirect discrimination and reasonable adjustments claims were dismissed because the tribunal held that the alleged practices were not PCPs on the facts. It found that the claimant was told in advance what would be discussed at the probationary meeting on 13 February 2020, that no material was relied on at that meeting in the way alleged, and that the delay in the appeal outcome and notes was a one-off response to the claimant's 8-page document and not a general practice under Ishola. It also found no substantial disadvantage and no knowledge of any need for adjustments.

The harassment claim related to sex was also dismissed. The claimant alleged inappropriate questions at interview on 17 July 2019, staring as she left the interview, a sexualised noise during the offer call on 23 July 2019, comments to colleagues, and a mid-January 2020 remark about sex and a small penis, but the tribunal did not find those allegations proved and accepted W's denials. It said some of the claimant's recollection appeared to have changed over time, but it did not need to rely on her disability to reject the allegations. No compensation was awarded because all claims failed.