Case 1808918/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M A Russell v John Lewis plc — 2024
- Case reference
- 1808918/2023
- Decision date
- 6 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Mr D Wilks, Mr K Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M A Russell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal unanimously decided the claimant's disability discrimination claims. In the failure to make reasonable adjustments claim, allegations 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 were dismissed, while allegations 3.5.3, 3.5.4 and 3.5.5 succeeded.
For the Section 15 disability discrimination complaints, complaint 2.1.1 was dismissed because the Tribunal did not extend time to determine it. Complaints 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 succeeded.
The Tribunal awarded £10,500 for injury to feelings and £1,203.46 interest, making a total award of £11,703.46. It stated that the recoupment regulations did not apply to the awards.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments allegations: allegations 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 were dismissed; allegations 3.5.3, 3.5.4 and 3.5.5 succeeded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Section 15 disability discrimination complaints: complaint 2.1.1 was dismissed because the Tribunal did not extend time to determine it; complaints 2.1.2 and 2.1.3 succeeded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,703
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 15 disability discrimination
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.