Case 1806029/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Farrow v Mrs N Foster and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 1806029/2020
- Decision date
- 1 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright
- Panel members
- Ms J Lee, Mr J Rhodes
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs K Farrow
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Leeds by CVP before Employment Judge Bright with lay members Ms J Lee and Mr J Rhodes, heard the case on 8, 9 and 10 February 2022. It found that the claimant’s complaint of discrimination arising from disability was well founded.
The tribunal rejected the claimant’s complaint of harassment related to disability. The extracted judgment does not record the underlying factual reasons for either conclusion, but it does record that the disability discrimination complaint succeeded and the harassment complaint failed.
A remedy hearing was listed following the liability decision. No monetary award is stated in the extracted judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment uses the phrase 'discrimination arising from disability'. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states this was 'harassment related to disability'. | Dismissed | 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.
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.