Case 1600713/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S. Samule-Thomas v University of Wales Trinity St David — 2022
- Case reference
- 1600713/2021
- Decision date
- 14 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S. Samule-Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 10 January 2022, Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan recorded that the claimant’s claims for direct disability discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and discrimination arising from disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 were dismissed after the claimant withdrew them. The judgment does not record any findings on the merits of those two claims.
The same judgment stated that it did not affect the claimant’s claims of constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination by breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments, which were being actively pursued. No remedy was awarded in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination under s.13 EqA 2010. The judgment records that the claim was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability under s.15 EqA 2010. The judgment records that the claim was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.