In person, supported by Nicole Milner of Support Through Court on Day 1 For the v John Robinson, Solicitor — 2023

The tribunal accepted that Mr Hadam was in employment with Torque Retail Services Limited for Equality Act purposes and that he had disabilities including depression, anxiety, PTSD, psychosis/paranoid schizophrenia and OCD. He worked as a warehouse operative through Know How at the respondent's Leeds site from 19 January 2021, and the evidence showed that agency workers were generally deployed on a narrower range of tasks than permanent staff.

The direct disability discrimination claim under s.13 failed. The tribunal found that, apart from the first day, the claimant was treated the same as other agency workers, and that the more limited range of tasks given to agency staff reflected how the respondent used temporary labour and the training they had, not the claimant's disability. The harassment claim also failed because the broom-handle comment was found to be a joke between colleagues, not directed at the claimant, and not related to his disability.

The s.15 claim succeeded. After the claimant's email of 3 March 2021 complaining about the incident, asking for more varied work and saying he might bring Equality Act proceedings, the tribunal found that Ms Whisker-Pollington decided on 4 March 2021 that he was Not Required Back because of that protected act and because he had said repetitive tasks worsened his mental health. The tribunal did not accept the later performance and conduct explanations as the real reason. The reasonable adjustments claim under ss.20 and 21 failed because the respondent did not know of any potential disadvantage until 3 March 2021, by which time the assignment had already been stood down and no adjustment could realistically have been made before the termination.

The victimisation claim succeeded for the same 4 March decision. The tribunal found the 3 March email was a protected act, noted that the 5 March emails also amounted to protected acts but could not causally affect the 4 March decision, and held that the burden of proof had not been displaced by the respondent. On remedy, the tribunal declined a psychiatric expert report as not reasonably required, made no recommendation, and awarded £4,000 for injury to feelings, £329 for financial loss and £676 interest, a total of £5,005. It found the claimant would have been on sick leave until 18 March 2021 in any event, likely would have worked until 16 April 2021, and that later work broke any further chain of loss; it made no separate personal injury award because of the overlap with injury to feelings.