Case 1601008/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Leeanne Bartley v Ruthin School and 2 others — 2024
- Case reference
- 1601008/2022
- Decision date
- 23 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins
- Panel members
- Ms C Bleasdale, Mrs M Walters
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mrs Leeanne Bartley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mrs Leeanne Bartley was disabled at the relevant times for the purposes of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010, by reference to anxiety and panic attacks, functional neurological disorder, and transient visual losses.
It then dismissed all of the claimant's complaints: constructive unfair dismissal, direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, harassment related to disability, and victimisation. The judgment states that the claim failed in its entirety, and no monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Complaint described in the judgment as constructive unfair dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination complaint. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability complaint. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to disability complaint. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 6 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.