Case 1601031/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Bradbury v Chaseblue Loans Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1601031/2020
- Decision date
- 1 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Davies
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Mrs L Bishop, Mrs K Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Bradbury
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Cardiff, sitting on 19 to 22 January 2021 before Employment Judge P Davies with Mrs L Bishop and Mrs K Smith as members, the tribunal unanimously found that Ms E Bradbury was unfairly dismissed, discriminated against by failing to make reasonable adjustments, and wrongfully dismissed. The written judgment records the outcomes only; it states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and does not set them out in writing.
The tribunal also recorded that the claim of direct discrimination because of disability was withdrawn and dismissed. A further discrimination arising from disability allegation concerning the claimant's suggestion to move from a sales role at the meeting of 13 January 2020 was also withdrawn and dismissed. The separate discrimination arising from disability allegation about being pulled into a meeting on 13 January 2020 and being told she was making colleagues walk on eggshells was dismissed.
The harassment claim was dismissed. No remedy was determined in the judgment, and the tribunal directed that if the parties could not agree remedy they should apply within 7 days of the date of sending for a remedy hearing, with any hearing expected to take one day and to be listed from May to September 2021 if needed.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct discrimination because of disability; withdrawn and dismissed by the Tribunal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability allegation about failing to agree or consider the Claimant's suggestion to move from a sales role at the meeting of 13 January 2020; withdrawn and dismissed by the Tribunal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability allegation about pulling the Claimant into a meeting on 13 January 2020 and accusing her of making colleagues walk on eggshells. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.