Case 1403426/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D. Patel (Counsel) v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1403426/2023
- Decision date
- 27 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail
- Venue
- Exeter
- Panel members
- Ms R. Barrett, Ms R. A. Clarke
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr D. Patel (Counsel)
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Exeter on 11-14 March 2024, Employment Judge Smail sitting with Ms R. Barrett and Ms R. A. Clarke found that South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust discriminated against Miss B. Rees arising from her disability when it dismissed her with effect from 21 February 2023. The tribunal also found that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability: the tribunal found the respondent discriminated against the claimant when it dismissed her with effect from 21 February 2023. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments: the tribunal found the respondent should have extended the review period under the sickness absence policy with enhanced targets reasonably taking into account the claimant's disability. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £19,557
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £6,184
- compensatory remedy recorded
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.