Case 1802204/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Lynskey v Direct Line Insurance Services Ltd Heard: In Leeds — 2023
- Case reference
- 1802204/2022
- Decision date
- 5 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
- Panel members
- Mr R Webb, Mr L Priestley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Lynskey
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs M Lynskey had worked for Direct Line Insurance Services Ltd since April 2016. The tribunal found that menopausal symptoms affecting mood, concentration, memory and resilience were apparent by March 2020, and that the respondent knew or ought reasonably to have known of the disability by then. Mr Dalby’s offer of a move from sales into the telematics team in June 2020 was treated as a practical adjustment and the tribunal found no unfavourable treatment in the May and June 2020 allegations.
The age and sex complaints were dismissed. The tribunal found that Ms Wilburn’s comments in October and November 2020, and the subsequent performance discussions, were about the claimant’s development in the telematics role and customer service standards, not age or sex. The harassment allegations on the same grounds were also dismissed. The constructive unfair dismissal complaint failed because the claimant affirmed the contract after the 15 September 2021 sick pay decision by continuing with the internal grievance and appeal process and not resigning until 4 May 2022.
The disability claim succeeded in part. The tribunal held that the requirement to meet the telematics performance standards placed the claimant at a substantial disadvantage because of the effects of her disability, and that reasonable steps could have included reducing targets, considering a non-telephony role, and avoiding the formal disciplinary route. It also found that the April 2021 written warning and the September 2021 removal of company sick pay were unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, and that the respondent had not shown proportionality. Time was extended on a just and equitable basis.
At remedy, the tribunal found past financial loss from January 2021 and rejected the remortgage costs as too remote. It recorded a compensatory sum of £23,000 and awarded £2,500 aggravated damages, with interest running from January 2021, but the extracted reasons do not set out a separate quantified financial-loss figure or a split between financial loss and injury to feelings.
Claims and outcomes
6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant affirmed her contract after the last alleged repudiatory breach on 15 September 2021 by remaining in the employment dispute process and not resigning until 4 May 2022. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination allegations were dismissed; the tribunal found the October and November 2020 comments and the later management steps were directed to performance and role development, not age. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination allegations were dismissed on the same basis as the age complaints. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The age- and sex-related harassment allegations, including the October/November 2020 and 29 October 2021 comments, were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Early disability-based allegations, including the May 2020 'constantly trying to keep [her] head above water' comment and the June 2020 transfer into telematics, were found not to be unfavourable treatment and did not establish discrimination. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £25,500
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £23,000
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
10 references- Western Excavating constructive dismissal
- Malik trust and confidence term
- Omilaju last straw doctrine
- Kaur affirmation/cumulative breach
- T-Systems v Lewis section 15 test
- Homer proportionality test
- Ridout knowledge for reasonable adjustments
- Madarassy burden of proof
- Hendricks conduct extending over a period
- s.123 just and equitable extension
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.